Quarterback and Rebuilding

[Neophyte]

I'm seeing it both ways today.

We did what we always do and traded draft picks for an old guy. True.

We also allowed ourselves to use that #4 pick for a lineman which gets us younger at a position we needed to get younger at (hell, we need a body at right now). Like BD said, without the McNabb deal we likely can't go line and probably don't have the 2nd anyway since it would have been traded with the #4 to move up.

I'm not completely on board with it all yet because I want some new, young blood. If the Shanahan/Allen can move a couple of these players that don't seem to really fit into our plans at the moment (Campbell, Rogers) or guys who may not have an attitude to Shanahan's liking (Haynesworth, Landry) in order to pick up a couple of picks on those rounds where we are lacking them, I will be more on board with McNabb deal.

 

[Billfishead]

Well, here is an outside opinion on all of the back and forth among us about this trade.

Skeptical fans should embrace McNabb trade

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AnHelbO9N4gGesBxhrTuyfs5nYcB?slug=lc-mcnabbintroduction040610

 

[Bulldog]

You really can't compare the trade for McNabb with any other move for a qb since Gibbs I.

The Redskins gave up far more in terms of compensation to acquire Brad Johnson from Minnesota whose resume at that point was limited.

The team spent free agent cash for a career troublemaker in Jeff George and traded later for a physically spent Mark Brunell.

In the draft the Redskins took two quarterbacks in Round 1. Patrick Ramsey left Washington saying he was a starting qb but where did he earn such a job?

Campbell was acquired to play in one type of offense but thrown into another by Zorn and Cerrato.

McNabb by contrast is a proven player witha track record of success who is healthy, knows the system and is familiar with the other defenses in the division.

And his compensation was less than the team spent for Johnson, Ramsey or Campbell.

In case anyone has forgotten the Dolphins gave up a #2 pick for AJ Feeley and the Chiefs did the same for Matt Cassel.

Either of these players compare to McNabb?
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[Henry]

You really can't compare the trade for McNabb with any other move for a qb since Gibbs I.

The Redskins gave up far more in terms of compensation to acquire Brad Johnson from Minnesota whose resume at that point was limited.

The team spent free agent cash for a career troublemaker in Jeff George and traded later for a physically spent Mark Brunell.

In the draft the Redskins took two quarterbacks in Round 1. Patrick Ramsey left Washington saying he was a starting qb but where did he earn such a job?

Campbell was acquired to play in one type of offense but thrown into another by Zorn and Cerrato.

McNabb by contrast is a proven player witha track record of success who is healthy, knows the system and is familiar with the other defenses in the division.

And his compensation was less than the team spent for Johnson, Ramsey or Campbell.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

You said the reason the Redskins have failed is "in major part because the team did NOT go out and spend megabucks to acquire a successful NFL quarterback" and "they went cheap at qb."

That's simply not true. The Redskins have invested heavily in the position. Putting forth the investment and having that investment work out are two different things.

You can't look back in hindsight and criticize a move versus a projection of success that hasn't happened yet. McNabb could go the way of Brunell or Johnson. Just as Bradford or Clausen could flame out like Shuler, Ramsey and Campbell. We don't know.

The problem hasn't been our lack of willingness to get a good QB. The problem has been pretty much everything else. A QB like Brad Johnson fails here and wins a SB with another team because we have had no stability, no plan and no willingness to build through the draft. Not because he's not a good QB. It's us, not him.

In case anyone has forgotten the Dolphins gave up a #2 pick for AJ Feeley and the Chiefs did the same for Matt Cassel.

Either of these players compare to McNabb?

The Feeley trade was absolutely insane, but the fact remains that both of those guys were much younger, and therefore presented their new team with a QB that could be built around for a decade. That's what you should spend a pick on. Not a stop-gap player.

You all keep talking about the risks involved with picking up a young QB. That's given. But the reason most good teams draft and develop QBs is because the rewards are far greater. What happens if Bradford or Clausen or whoever doesn't work out? The same thing that happens if McNabb doesn't work out. On the other hand, what happens if a rookie DOES work out? The QB position is set for 10-15 years. If McNabb works out we get 5 on the outside.

But the fact is the deal is done and McNabb is here and I hope we get those five years. It sure would be better than nothing.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

RE: the chicken and the egg argument - OLine vs. Franchise QB.

I think it works both ways. A franchise QB will look even better with a stud OL - see Peyton Manning. He's had great success - and has been in the top 10 fewest sacked almost every season since his rookie season.

However, a franchise QB can also make your OLine look good - take a look at Tom Brady. Patriots OLine has been okay over the years, they're usually middle of the pack in terms of sacks allowed, however Tom can elude the pass rush like no other.

EDIT: Then you have a guy like Roethlisberger, an OLineman's worst nightmare. He holds the ball forever, but is big and strong enough to throw while getting hit, or shrug off sacks, or just avoid pressure. Ben was sacked 49 times in 2008, 4th worst in the league!

There's a balance in there somewhere.

 

[Jimbo]

I think being depressed and cynical with a brand new coaching staff and new team yet to play a down is not the way to start out a new Redskins era. I'm not a McNabb fan, but I've got to muster some optimism.

Not depressed or cynical.....YET, but definitely skeptical. I don't like McNabb either but, to quote TO (minus the tears), "He's my Quarterback".

I hate that he's now considered a Redskin and I'm still hoping we can draft a guy like John Skelton to develop but, until that time, I'll cheer my arse off for him. It won't be easy though.

 

[Terry]

The problem is that the NFL is a win now league and we have a short attention span owner. Shanahan will have to come in and establish a winning culture as quickly as possible (with today's players in general and our recent history in particular it's almost mandatory), even as he builds the team for long term sustainability.

So he brought in a proven QB and a winner. This allows him to demonstrate to the players we have now that he's not throwing away years from their careers, they get to see what a proven QB and leader looks like, and with a quality QB, Shanahan has an easier job of finding out which of his receivers can step it up to the next level.

But the real key is that with the QB position locked down for the near term, he has the luxury of finding and grooming our next franchise QB without the pressure of that young QB having to win sooner rather than later.

Win now or rebuild isn't an option in the NFL any more, the successful franchises have to be able to find a way to do both. You saw that with Shanahan in Detroit, even when he had great running backs, he kept drafting more, and so was always ready to replace quality with quality.

We need to win now AND we need to get ahead of the personnel acquisition curve. McNabb solves one part of that at the QB slot, and my guess is that a draft pick expended on a QB this year will solve the other.

 

[Bulldog]

I think some of you judge success differently than I do.

When the Redskins acquired those quarterbacks on my list only Mark Brunell had established a true mark of success in the NFL by making the pro bowl and taking his team deep into the playoffs.

And we saw in that case how the wear and tear had compromised his talent in 2004.

A lot of NFL observers had questions about Patrick Ramsey and Jason Campbell.

The Redskins chose both players a round or two before many expected them to go.

The fact Shanahan was able to fleece the Skins out of extra picks to move up and take Campbell only contributes to the current depth problems the team has.

If the Redskins had been forced to give up or exchange first round picks with the Eagles I would have been against this move.

Coming out of this draft with a top OT prospect and a quarterback were my expectations.

The fact we may end up with Okung or Bulaga and McNabb instead of Okung/Bulaga and Clausen/McCoy doesn't concern me in the least.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[Henry]

Bulldog, so you contend that a MAJOR reason the Redskins have struggled all these years ... is because we have steadfastly refused to find a way to acquire, specifically, an established top-tier veteran QB with pro bowl credentials and playoff experience through a trade or free agency?

Sorry, I think that's nuts.

All you have to do is look at how many players like that are available at any given time and how many teams maintain sustained success following that model to realize it.

 

[Elephant]

Bulldog, so you contend that a MAJOR reason the Redskins have struggled all these years ... is because we have steadfastly refused to find a way to acquire, specifically, an established top-tier veteran QB with pro bowl credentials and playoff experience through a trade or free agency?

Sorry, I think that's nuts.

All you have to do is look at how many players like that are available at any given time and how many teams maintain sustained success following that model to realize it.

Henry, there have been 7 SB winning QB's in the past ten years...

Trent Dilfer - FA
Brad Johnson - FA
Tom Brady x3 - 6th round draft
Ben Rothlisberger x2 - 1st round
Peyton Manning - 1st Round
Eli Manning - 1st Round
Drew Brees - FA

Minnesota acquired Brett Favre and immediately became a top contender because they had put all the other pieces in place. The Saints won the SB because they chose to sign Drew Brees. Hasselback was a trade from Green Bay and was great in Seattle.

These moves are a legitimate method of obtaining a QB. Would I like to see us draft Jake Locker next year, given the chance, to sit behind McNabb for a few years? Absolutely. Hell, I would even like Tim Tebow to get a chance to sit behind McNabb for 3 or 4 years to develop. But for now, our choice is Donovan, he's here. A franchise QB can be obtained 3 different ways. We got our through a trade.

 

[Henry]

This is my last post about this and then I'm jumping on the bandwagon.

Henry, there have been 7 SB winning QB's in the past ten years...

Trent Dilfer - FA - Was 27 at the time. Besides, you can throw him off the list. He was the backup at the beginning of the season. The Ravens won despite having him under center, not because of him. They didn't even re-sign him after that season.

Brad Johnson - FA - If you are using this as proof that all we needed to do was sign a veteran in order to win a superbowl, we would have won one because he was with us first. If anything, his presence on this list proves that failing to acquire a vet WASN'T what we we've been doing wrong.

Tom Brady x3 - 6th round draft
Ben Rothlisberger x2 - 1st round
Peyton Manning - 1st Round
Eli Manning - 1st Round
Seven of the past ten superbowls have been won by quarterbacks drafted by the team they won it with? That pretty much supports my position of getting a young guy and building team around him, doesn't it?

Drew Brees - FA - Was 27 when NO picked him up. There's a big difference between 27 and 33. Even with Brees, an established vet, it took NO four years to win the SB with him. Four years is the outside of our window. And then we have to start over with a new QB.

Minnesota acquired Brett Favre and immediately became a top contender because they had put all the other pieces in place. The Saints won the SB because they chose to sign Drew Brees. Hasselback was a trade from Green Bay and was great in Seattle.

Minnesota was already the division champ when they signed Favre. They were legitimately a QB away, which we are most definitely not. I believe I've covered Brees. Hasselbeck was 26 when he went to Seattle, and then it took the Seahawks three years to so much as make the playoffs. Again, that's near the close of our McNabb window.

These moves are a legitimate method of obtaining a QB.

Yes they are. But they are not the ONLY way for a team to succeed in this league. They are not even the PREFERRED way. They represent the exceptions, not the rule. McNabb is a great QB, so I'm holding out hope that he's one of those exceptions too. But let's not pat the Redskins on the back for suddenly figuring out the secret formula on how to put together a winning program when they pick up a FA QB who's considerably older than every single example you offered (save Brad Johnson who, you know, was on our team.)

Would I like to see us draft Jake Locker next year, given the chance, to sit behind McNabb for a few years? Absolutely. Hell, I would even like Tim Tebow to get a chance to sit behind McNabb for 3 or 4 years to develop. But for now, our choice is Donovan, he's here. A franchise QB can be obtained 3 different ways. We got our through a trade.

That's cool. I'm done bitching now. I'm on board. I did crack a smile when I saw him holding up his new Redskins jersey.

And at the very least, the McNabb era is over in Philly, and that makes me very happy.

 

[Boone]

I may be cynical, but I'm not depressed.

We can certainly rationalize anything the team does now by saying "Shanahan's smart and a great coach and that makes this a good move." I can't argue with that. He is a good coach. Hopefully every move he makes will be a good one.

And there is a part of me excited at the prospect of Shanahan finding his new Elway. I admit it. And when McNabb takes the field for the Burgundy and Gold this September I'll be as juiced up as the rest of you.

However, you gotta bend over backwards and sideways and inside out to come up with a way to suggest that it's BETTER to rebuild a team around an old QB than a young one. That it's smart to trade youth for age. That the reason the Redskins have struggled is because they've ignored the QB position.

All of that is crazy-talk in my opinion. Trying to make the deal sound better and smarter than it is. That's Redskin PR department material.

This is a smart move because Shanahan made it and he's smart. Go with that. That's the best way to look at this. Not '4-12 teams with crappy offenses shouldn't draft a QB because it's too risky.'

I agree with most of that. Except not sure where you are coming from with the idea I think it's better to rebuild a around an older QB - maybe that wasn't directed at me, dunno. But I wrote a blog 6 hours before the McNabb announcement saying the Redskins would and should draft a QB at pick #4. Hell, I'd still draft Bradford if he fell to me there, even with McNabb and all of the o-line hysteria that would follow. I agree with you. I do think it's fair to say that teams have won with veteran QBs before, in all kinds of situations.

The biggest issue I have with all this isn't strategy-related at all. I just don't LIKE McNabb. He strikes me as a cocky, selfish, me-first kind of a guy. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I've always disliked him, and I'm not sure putting him in a Redskins jersey is going to change that.

 

[Henry]

I agree with most of that. Except not sure where you are coming from with the idea I think it's better to rebuild a around an older QB - maybe that wasn't directed at me, dunno. But I wrote a blog 6 hours before the McNabb announcement saying the Redskins would and should draft a QB at pick #4. Hell, I'd still draft Bradford if he fell to me there, even with McNabb and all of the o-line hysteria that would follow. I agree with you. I do think it's fair to say that teams have won with veteran QBs before, in all kinds of situations.

Oh, that part wasn't addressing anything you wrote. That was more about the OP. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

The biggest issue I have with all this isn't strategy-related at all. I just don't LIKE McNabb. He strikes me as a cocky, selfish, me-first kind of a guy. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I've always disliked him, and I'm not sure putting him in a Redskins jersey is going to change that.

Oddly, I'm the exact opposite. I actually LIKE McNabb despite the fact that he's an Eagle. I've always thought he carried that team far further than it deserved. My issue is not with him at all. Weird.

 

[Boone]

He just strikes me as a smug SOB. Every time I see him smile I want to slap the hell out of him Maybe I just can't see beyond my Philly hatred and he'll grow on me if he starts winning us some games. Lord I help so. Otherwise, I'll be getting on YOUR bandwagon.

 

[Cycleans]

I don't think the standard formula for building around a qb applies here. Most of the examples given to support the idea that the last X# superbowls were won by teams that drafted the qb in the first round...while true...its also misleading.
I would support that from a different perspective. The teams that find success drafting a qb(regardless of round)already have an above average OL and a serviceable defense in place. Add to that a stable coaching staff.
In the Skins case way too many misses in the draft and free agency and as a result our Oline is in shambles. In 2 yrs we've lost 3 starters on the oline, that weren't bad players. Jansen, Thomas and Samuels. Thats a significant hit for any team.
No qb can produce behind a crappy oline in our division. While Donovan will also take his lumps he does have a knack for finding an open guy. If we get our oline at least up to average standards this season... well thinking about grooming a young qb in the future makes sense.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Tom Brady x3 - 6th round draft
Ben Rothlisberger x2 - 1st round
Peyton Manning - 1st Round
Eli Manning - 1st Round
Seven of the past ten superbowls have been won by quarterbacks drafted by the team they won it with? That pretty much supports my position of getting a young guy and building team around him, doesn't it?

Okay Henry, but of those QBs, both Brady and Eli Manning were drafted onto teams with established, veteran QBs ahead of them on roster. Brady had Bledsoe (drafted by the Pats) and Friesz (FA) ahead of him, and Manning had Kurt Warner (FA) ahead of him. Roethlispickle had Maddox in front of him, but won the job in camp. Peyton was the only guy drafted to play immediately, I believe.

So, these situations also reinforce the veteran QB addition, IMO.

EDIT: And in reality, I don't think you can even include Brady in these discussions. He was a 6th round pick, and was never expected to be more than a 2nd or 3rd string QB...his success at this level way beyond even the Patriots imagined when drafting him.

 

[CounterTrey]

I agree with most of that. Except not sure where you are coming from with the idea I think it's better to rebuild a around an older QB - maybe that wasn't directed at me, dunno. But I wrote a blog 6 hours before the McNabb announcement saying the Redskins would and should draft a QB at pick #4. Hell, I'd still draft Bradford if he fell to me there, even with McNabb and all of the o-line hysteria that would follow. I agree with you. I do think it's fair to say that teams have won with veteran QBs before, in all kinds of situations.

The biggest issue I have with all this isn't strategy-related at all. I just don't LIKE McNabb. He strikes me as a cocky, selfish, me-first kind of a guy. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I've always disliked him, and I'm not sure putting him in a Redskins jersey is going to change that.

+1

It could be my bias that is at the heart of my misgivings, we'll see. I am thrilled though that we at long last have a freakin franchise QB, old and going past his prime or not. We haven't had a QB worth a crap since 1991. On that part I'm with Bulldog, I think in today's league the franchise QB has become more of a premium than it was in the past.

 

[Yusuf06]

I would like this team to actually try and build a perennial contender. Not a team that flashes for a year or two and then slides back into obscurity. I want a Dynasty. Or at the very least, a team with an Identity. The Steelers and Ravens punch you in the face. The Chargers have an explosive NFC East-style offense. The Packers beat you in the air and the Vikings beat you on the ground.

I've said the same thing over the years too Henry and being honest about it, I hated the move upon first hearing about it. However over the past few days I've had a chance to marinate in the idea and I've concluded that there are a few things that just didn't come to mind right away.

First, there's the cyclical nature of the fortunes of most NFL teams. In general, NFL teams build, make a few runs at a SB with a core of key players, get a Lombardi or not, and then due to the salary cap and/or age and injuries the window closes and the rebuilding process starts. For us I think one could make the case that we have a really solid defense capable of limiting almost any NFL offense's point production. Add a QB/OL capable of consistently scoring 22-24 points per game and this team would easily make the paloffs-on a regular basis.

Assuming we do rebuild the OL, adding McNabb means we get the defense and offense on the same "schedule" if you will. At the point that McNabb is about done, i.e. hopefully 4-5 years, the defense will also need rebuilding. If we haven't gotten another Lombardi by that time, it'll be time to blow it up and rebuild anyway.

Besides, as I mentioned earlier the high number of tradeable players we have means we're likely to get at least one more early pick to work with. So that could easily mean McNabb playing behind OT's Okung and Charles Brown, Roger Saffold, or V. Ducasse. IMHO, that would put us one draft and perhaps a F.A. away from really contending. Not bad.

Another important thing to remember: Shanahan's system doesn't necessarily need high-round draft picks on the OLine. Zone-blocking OL are smaller and lighter, and as a result, tend to drop further in the draft. So if we all agree its a no-brainer to get Okung in the first, Shanahan could take a couple guys that fit his system in the later rounds and it would be a-okay.

I will say, Shanahan coaching McNabb is eerily similar to Shanahan coaching Elway, which gets me a little moist.

I know it's going to be a bit odd to hear it coming from me, but I'm actually feeling a little, 'er "moist" myself about things. OK, somebody pick Mike up off the floor. Please? A little help. Somebody?

The reason I'm so uncharacteristically positive these days is that McNabb has been a very good, often elite QB during the course of his career. However, he's done that mostly with a pedestrian receiving corps and a coach that for whatever reason, seems to hate to run the ball. Shanahan OTOH loves to run the ball and we've got some decent, potentially very good weapons at receiver. In short, I am sooo looking forward to seeing what kind of fireworks are possible when Shanny squared (I oughta patent that one) and McNabb are both fighting with tools. (mildly NSFW)

So, call me crazy but that just gives me the feeling that our future is so bright, we're gonna need...well, you know.

 

[Henry]

Okay Henry, but of those QBs, both Brady and Eli Manning were drafted onto teams with established, veteran QBs ahead of them on roster. Brady had Bledsoe (drafted by the Pats) and Friesz (FA) ahead of him, and Manning had Kurt Warner (FA) ahead of him. Roethlispickle had Maddox in front of him, but won the job in camp. Peyton was the only guy drafted to play immediately, I believe.

So, these situations also reinforce the veteran QB addition, IMO.

Those situations do not reinforce building a team by emptying the wallet for a top-notch veteran QB, which was the point I was arguing against.

Now I really am done.

Go McNabb!

 

[Terry]

Nobody should be allowed to use Brady as an example of anything except dumb luck. If the Pats knew that Brady would turn out to be... Brady, they would have grabbed him earlier.

What he is an example of is something we used to do with Beathard/Gibbs, take a lower round QB three out of four drafts, and see if you turn up a keeper.