Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Kiper Says Clausen at #4 ..
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RSkinGM


Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3466
Location: Richmond, Va
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:41 am    Post subject: Kiper Says Clausen at #4 .. Reply with quote

and best Tackle available at #37, round 2 .. Just way too early to take this seriously but it is interesting fodder..

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/kipers-argument-for-the-redski.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
e16bball


Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 14993
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To me, this is the exact same argument footy made the other day. I'd say Kiper owes footy a beer and a reuben sandwich.

Just to recap my response to that argument, I'd say that this line of thinking makes perfect sense...if you're convinced the first two rounds MUST be used on a package of QB/LT. I'm not convinced of this. I'd be perfectly happy with LT/MLB or LT/NT or Berry/LT or any number of permutations.

From my perspective, the only thing the Redskins HAVE to do is address the OL in the first two rounds. Other than that, I feel we have some flexibility. A QB should be taken ONLY if he's "the guy"...not simply because the rest of this particular draft class of QBs is crap.
_________________


O.J. Atogwe Tracker: 25 Tackles | 1 INT | 2 PDs | 2 TFLs | 1 sack
Saverio Rocca Tracker: 44.2 AVG | 41.2 NET | 14/25 IN20
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RSkinGM


Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3466
Location: Richmond, Va
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

None of the QB's in this draft have pedigrees like,,,say, Eli and Philip Rivers when they were drafted.. I just can't be excited by any of these guys --at number 4 ..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
midniterc


Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 6653
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

e16bball wrote:

From my perspective, the only thing the Redskins HAVE to do is address the OL in the first two rounds. Other than that, I feel we have some flexibility. A QB should be taken ONLY if he's "the guy"...not simply because the rest of this particular draft class of QBs is crap.


I have a few thoughts on the issue of QB draft. First, I don't think any QB should be drafted and immediately put into a starting role. Stafford and Sanchez did okay, but many of them don't. Some take a little time to grasp it all before being successful. I think Vince Young was over his head at first, but is now becoming a good QB after being on the bench. Campbell is good enough to hold the reigns until Bradford/Clausen is ready to take over. It would be a smoother transition.

Second, The Redskins could also draft one of the second tier QBs in the second round. McCoy, Pike, Lefevour. That pick would be okay if they are not looking to get rid of Campbell anytime soon, but could do well enough if they were pressed into service. Kevin Kolb of the Eagles is that type of pick.

Any QB picked late is usually destined to hold a clipboard. We drafted Colt Brennan for that role. What's the worst he could do?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S. Taylor


Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 11174
Location: By the Lake
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In 2015, when Jimmy Clausen is the Superbowl MVP for the Washington Redskins... it will all make sense.




Seriously, though... I wouldn't be mad with Clausen at #4.
I really think he's going to be a great QB in the NFL.

However, I still fear that the Rams will take Clausen at #1.

My favorite pick would be Eric Berry at #4, but only time will tell!
_________________
"What's a classic these days, when they call your stuff a classic on release day?
I'm in the wrong era & it's clear to me."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
PARROTHEAD


Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 4379
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yesterday on Total Access when reviewing the OTs and a bit of the Skins.
Maylock (sp?) and the rest seemed to think the same way. When bringing up the OTs he said, "The first real need is at 5."

They did say any of the first 3 could start at LT for the Redskins. But mainly attacked the qb position like most the regular media.
"Shanahan wants his franchise guy" All anyone wants to say.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RSkinGM


Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3466
Location: Richmond, Va
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PARROTHEAD wrote:
Yesterday on Total Access when reviewing the OTs and a bit of the Skins.
Maylock (sp?) and the rest seemed to think the same way. When bringing up the OTs he said, "The first real need is at 5."

They did say any of the first 3 could start at LT for the Redskins. But mainly attacked the qb position like most the regular media.
"Shanahan wants his franchise guy" All anyone wants to say.


"The first real need is at 5" .?? Meaning need for an Offensive Tackle and Kansas City..?? The Redskins don't have a REAL need..Coulda fooled me .. !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 60855
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agree 100%, no need to take a QB just because we have a top 5 pick. We need to take the BPA for our team.

e16bball wrote:
To me, this is the exact same argument footy made the other day. I'd say Kiper owes footy a beer and a reuben sandwich.

Just to recap my response to that argument, I'd say that this line of thinking makes perfect sense...if you're convinced the first two rounds MUST be used on a package of QB/LT. I'm not convinced of this. I'd be perfectly happy with LT/MLB or LT/NT or Berry/LT or any number of permutations.

From my perspective, the only thing the Redskins HAVE to do is address the OL in the first two rounds. Other than that, I feel we have some flexibility. A QB should be taken ONLY if he's "the guy"...not simply because the rest of this particular draft class of QBs is crap.

_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
óDays until: NFL Draft 28; Training camp 94
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 60855
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Or Matt Ryan. If any of those 3 QBs are in this draft with no injury issues I go QB but there are Questions with both Clausen and Bradford from injuries to arm strength, to systems they ran, to attitudes, to if they can win because they couldn't in college. You name it questions all over the place with both QBs. So I would stay away and draft the BPA, in a Position of NEED.

RSkinGM wrote:
None of the QB's in this draft have pedigrees like,,,say, Eli and Philip Rivers when they were drafted.. I just can't be excited by any of these guys --at number 4 ..

_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
óDays until: NFL Draft 28; Training camp 94
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 60855
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The only thing i can distinctly remeber Mel Kiper being right about pertaining to the NFL Draft in the 15 years I've watched it was that Trev Alberts was a bad pick by the Colts. Other than that, I take his opinons with a grain of salt just like all the other talking heads at ESPN.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
óDays until: NFL Draft 28; Training camp 94
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
moss89petey


Joined: 06 Jan 2007
Posts: 815
Location: Maryland
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
Agree 100%, no need to take a QB just because we have a top 5 pick. We need to take the BPA for our team.

e16bball wrote:
To me, this is the exact same argument footy made the other day. I'd say Kiper owes footy a beer and a reuben sandwich.

Just to recap my response to that argument, I'd say that this line of thinking makes perfect sense...if you're convinced the first two rounds MUST be used on a package of QB/LT. I'm not convinced of this. I'd be perfectly happy with LT/MLB or LT/NT or Berry/LT or any number of permutations.

From my perspective, the only thing the Redskins HAVE to do is address the OL in the first two rounds. Other than that, I feel we have some flexibility. A QB should be taken ONLY if he's "the guy"...not simply because the rest of this particular draft class of QBs is crap.


Me too. Look at the elite teams in this league.. Most of their OL's are composed of late round picks and even UDFA. There is no need to take an OL in the top 5 unless he is a cant miss guy, like a Jake long or Joe Thomas. Okung is like neither of those guys. That mean we take BPA for our team.

Joe Haden, Rolando McClain(if switch to a 3-4), or Suh/McCoy (If available)

I believe we grab one of these elite guys in the first, grab the best OL available in the 2nd and go from there. By signing a good amount of OL depth in FA, we can quickly improve our OL next season. You can't go out and draft 3 lineman and expect them to start next season. Getting a guy in the 2nd who can start, along with 2-3 FA signings automatically gives us a respectable line. We then can build upon our OL by drafting more in the following years to come
_________________
You'll do great things Jake Locker.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 60855
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

moss89petey wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Agree 100%, no need to take a QB just because we have a top 5 pick. We need to take the BPA for our team.

e16bball wrote:
To me, this is the exact same argument footy made the other day. I'd say Kiper owes footy a beer and a reuben sandwich.

Just to recap my response to that argument, I'd say that this line of thinking makes perfect sense...if you're convinced the first two rounds MUST be used on a package of QB/LT. I'm not convinced of this. I'd be perfectly happy with LT/MLB or LT/NT or Berry/LT or any number of permutations.

From my perspective, the only thing the Redskins HAVE to do is address the OL in the first two rounds. Other than that, I feel we have some flexibility. A QB should be taken ONLY if he's "the guy"...not simply because the rest of this particular draft class of QBs is crap.


Me too. Look at the elite teams in this league.. Most of their OL's are composed of late round picks and even UDFA. There is no need to take an OL in the top 5 unless he is a cant miss guy, like a Jake long or Joe Thomas. Okung is like neither of those guys. That mean we take BPA for our team.

Joe Haden, Rolando McClain(if switch to a 3-4), or Suh/McCoy (If available)

I believe we grab one of these elite guys in the first, grab the best OL available in the 2nd and go from there. By signing a good amount of OL depth in FA, we can quickly improve our OL next season. You can't go out and draft 3 lineman and expect them to start next season. Getting a guy in the 2nd who can start, along with 2-3 FA signings automatically gives us a respectable line. We then can build upon our OL by drafting more in the following years to come


My point is the BPA in an are of need for our team and our greatest need is OL and I would take Okung over either of the QBs. I would also take McClain, Suh/McCoy, or Berry over either of the QBs and definelty over Haden.

So let me get this straight. You are ok with taking the 6th or 7th best OT in the draft instead of the best??? How exactly does that help the worst unit on our team for next season?? We should take the BA OT at #4 if they are worthy of that selection. As of right now Okung is. If he goes out and has a poor showing at the combine, pro day and workouts then I'd say take the BA player that isn't an OT or trade down and take Campbell, Davis, or Bugala. Right now though Okung is still the #1 OT on just about everyones board, and everyone says won't go past KC (1 spot behind us). There are maybe 5 so called experts out of a million.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
óDays until: NFL Draft 28; Training camp 94
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
DaKingPin


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2349
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If we draft a qb this year especially with our first round pick I think i'm going to throw my remote and break my tv. Look at the qb prospects next year way better than this year.

Just the fact that if Mallet or Locker came out this year. Bradford and Clausen would have automatically dropped to 3 and 4 and not even taken most likely in the top 20 and we want to use the 4th overall pick on them?These two are the top rated qbs this year but that doesn't make them good qbs. They just go in the first automatically because of team needs for qb not because they are actually worthy of that selection.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redskins4789


Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 2682
Location: Enterprise Alabama
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PARROTHEAD wrote:
Yesterday on Total Access when reviewing the OTs and a bit of the Skins.
Maylock (sp?) and the rest seemed to think the same way. When bringing up the OTs he said, "The first real need is at 5."

They did say any of the first 3 could start at LT for the Redskins. But mainly attacked the qb position like most the regular media.
"Shanahan wants his franchise guy" All anyone wants to say.


Yeah I saw that to and it pissed me off how stupid some of these commentators are, I hate the NFL Network anylist especially Dukes and Sapp. I also hate Jason La confora he always finds a way to bash the skins.
_________________
RIP #21 Sean Taylor

Deadpulse on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 60855
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I couldn't agree more man! Where have you been the past 2 weeks! Laughing Not only your points but both QBs are coming in with major surgeries on their bodies. Whens the last time a team took a player top 5 coming of ligament surgery on their shoulder or foot??

DaKingPin wrote:
If we draft a qb this year especially with our first round pick I think i'm going to throw my remote and break my tv. Look at the qb prospects next year way better than this year.

Just the fact that if Mallet or Locker came out this year. Bradford and Clausen would have automatically dropped to 3 and 4 and not even taken most likely in the top 20 and we want to use the 4th overall pick on them?These two are the top rated qbs this year but that doesn't make them good qbs. They just go in the first automatically because of team needs for qb not because they are actually worthy of that selection.

_________________
RIP SSFmike23md
Quote:
óDays until: NFL Draft 28; Training camp 94
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group