'Skins better off waiting for Barkley

So... the writer makes the argument that Griff is an unknown quantity as the basis for going "all in" on Barkley or Jones in 2013.




Why does this guy have a job with a major newspaper?

The flop last season cost Shanahan a lot of leeway in DC. He can't be sure his job will survive waiting another year before fixing the QB situation.

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 08:09 AM ET  03.01 by Otis B. Driftwood

Why does this guy have a job with a major newspaper?

the law of relativity?

Way to aim high. In other words, "Let's just expect to draft one of the top 5 picks again next year." Gotta be depressing for 'Skins fans. (Chico, hbomb, etc.)

QUOTE(#3):

Originally posted 08:14 AM ET  03.01 by TxHeat

the law of relativity?

Somehow, the swirling vortex of a toilet and the contents thereof seems more appropriate.

They are #6 now, and would need to move up to #2. Next year, they might need to move up to #1 to get Barkley, and where will they finish? Suppose the teams at #1 and #2 both need quarterbacks as badly as the Skins do?

This is an unusual year, when the team with the #2 pick really doesn't want to draft a quarterback, so they're willing to deal the pick.

Somehow, "Suck for Barkley" doesn't have the same ring to it.

QUOTE(#4):

Originally posted 08:16 AM ET  03.01 by Wawa-we-wa

Way to aim high. In other words, "Let's just expect to draft one of the top 5 picks again next year." Gotta be depressing for 'Skins fans. (Chico, hbomb, etc.)

My thought exactly. This is exactly what a new coach coming into a program means when he talks about creating a winning culture: getting rid of this mindset.

QUOTE(#3):

Originally posted 08:14 AM ET  03.01 by TxHeat

the law of relativity?

In Massachusetts, that's how you get a job with the Probation Department.

QUOTE(#6):

Originally posted 08:18 AM ET  03.01 by Debbie Does

They are #6 now, and would need to move up to #2. Next year, they might need to move up to #1 to get Barkley, and where will they finish? Suppose the teams at #1 and #2 both need quarterbacks as badly as the Skins do?This is an unusual year, when the team with the #2 pick really doesn't want to draft a quarterback, so they're willing to deal the pick. Somehow, "Suck for Barkley" doesn't have the same ring to it.

Given recent history, I'd be at least a little hesitant to put my franchise in the hands of a USC QB, anyway. The next Leinert or the next Sanchize?

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 08:09 AM ET  03.01 by Otis B. Driftwood

So... the writer makes the argument that Griff is an unknown quantity as the basis for going "all in" on Barkley or Jones in 2013. Why does this guy have a job with a major newspaper?

The idiots from the Post, write like your typical FN poster.

QUOTE(#4):

Originally posted 08:16 AM ET  03.01 by Wawa-we-wa

Way to aim high. In other words, "Let's just expect to draft one of the top 5 picks again next year." Gotta be depressing for 'Skins fans. (Chico, hbomb, etc.)

RG3 to DC depressing ?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!

They will over pay for RGIII. Giving up their top ten first rounder this year and their 1st rounder next year plus two other low round picks. Their O line still stinks. The receiving corps is not much better. They need a lot of help. They do need a QB this year, however, so, it might be better to trade down than up. Tannehill? Weedon?

Couldn't the Skins get a thread about how they stated that they WILL go after the top FA WR's ?



Yeah.... It's true.

Want a Barkley...take Charles.

The Redskins need a quarterback. They also need to give him someone to throw to.

According to a Washington Post report, the Redskins are going to try to address the need for a wide receiver in free agency, and they will be going after some of the biggest names available.

Among the possibilities floated in the article were Vincent Jackson of San Diego and Reggie Wayne and Pierre Garcon of the Colts.

This is not exactly surprising news; the need at receiver is well-documented and has been expressed by the team???s coaches. Jabar Gaffney led the team with 947 yards receiving in 2011.

The free-agent route may be the best way to go to fill the need at receiver if the Redskins do trade up in the draft to land Robert Griffin III. Such a deal would cost the Redskins multiple top draft picks, which would make it difficult to build the receiver corps via the draft. A top free-agent receiver should be able to be productive immediately and would give Griffin, or whoever the Redskins??? quarterback is, a reliable target.

QUOTE(#11):

Originally posted 08:25 AM ET  03.01 by Robataille

RG3 to DC depressing ?HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!

The mindset of, "We'll be drafting high next year too" is depressing.

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 08:09 AM ET  03.01 by Otis B. Driftwood

Why does this guy have a job with a major newspaper?

He doesn't. He works for the Post.

QUOTE(#16):

Originally posted 08:30 AM ET  03.01 by Wawa-we-wa

The mindset of, "We'll be drafting high next year too" is depressing.

Dude.... 20 years.

QUOTE(#16):

Originally posted 08:30 AM ET  03.01 by Wawa-we-wa

The mindset of, "We'll be drafting high next year too" is depressing.

The acquisition of RG3 would be a HUGE badly needed shot in the arm to the Redskins fanbase.


Depressed ?

The article indicates, among other things, there are plenty of problems with the Redskins (not just at qb), the Browns have an easier way to trade up for #2, the local fans seem to have the hots for a qb du jour, and the Skins may not be the best judge of qb talent. The headline of this thread is not the gist of the writer's article.