A (Partial) Guide To Trading Up For Robert Griffin III
by J.L. White on Jan 22, 2012 10:05 AM PST
Email
Print
I don't know if the Seahawks should invest a good chunk of draft capital acquiring Robert Griffin III. I don't know if Pete Carroll and John Schneider would want to go so far out of their way to draft him, or if there's another QB that is (or could be available) that they would rather get. A lot can change between now and late April, and nothing is set in stone (other than Andrew Luck getting picked #1).
Assuming there isn't a devastating injury or outrageous scandal in the next three-and-a-half months, Griffin is the 2nd-best QB in the 2012 Draft, and will almost certainly be one of the first 10 players picked. Right now the Seahawks will either wind up with the 11th or 12th overall pick, and the chances that Griffin falls to us is probably less than 1%. So if the Seahawks want Griffin (and I am not certain they are, as I said), then they'll need to trade up for, arguably, the best QB the Seahawks could possibly hope to acquire this offseason.
And the path to the Heisman-winning QB out of Baylor University goes through The-City-That-Probably-Has-A-Nickname-But-I-Don't-Feel-Like-Looking-It-Up, Cleveland.
The Indianapolis Colts are going to draft (and keep) Andrew Luck. I know I should preface that with "barring any unforeseen developments" or whatnot, but at this point the only thing keeping Luck out of Indy is the sun exploding. On a related matter, it is 100% factual that Manning is owed a $28 million-dollar roster bonus on March 8th, and let's just say that you don't want to give up that kind of pocket change -- as well as the rest of the guaranteed contract the man just signed less than a year ago -- to, at best, a 36-year0old backup QB who is flirting with the idea of retirement (that is, if actor/Colts fan/not an NFL reporter in any way Rob Lowe has anything to say about it). That probably means that one of the best QBs in NFL history will be a free agent, and he'll either sign with another team or retire. Instead of speculating what other teams could or couldn't be interested in Manning, we'll move on to the next team in the draft order.
The St. Louis Rams are not going to trade Sam Bradford. Jeez, he makes a TON of money and just looked AWFUL last season; short of sleeping with Jeff Fisher's daughter (if he has one), Bradford gets another year. The Rams could use a stud receiver to put next to Brandon Lloyd (assuming he stays) next year, but they could also use 7 or 8 new defensive players as well.They could trade back....but more likely it'll be for a team that wants USC left tackle Matt Kalil.
Because Kalil and the Minnesota Vikings are a match made in heaven. The Vikes just drafted Christian Ponder and gave Adrian Peterson gobs and gobs of money, so there is incentive to keep those two healthy and upright (also, replace Peterson with Toby Gehart if Peterson's knee injuries are worse than I think). If Kalil isn't there, Minny will probably trade back.
Now we come to the Cleveland Browns, and their Rudy-esque QB Colt McCoy. On the one hand, the Browns looked COMPLETELY INEPT on offense last season (barely beating Charlie freakin' Whitehurst AT HOME = completely inept); on the other hand Browns ended the season with the 22nd-ranked offense according to Football Outsiders, and that may have had more to do with the chronic injuries to Peyton Hillis and Montario Hardesty (I spelled his name right before I googled his name to confirm the spelling! Awesome!!!).
Will they give McCoy another shot? Will they draft Griffin? Will they just give Matt Flynn $50 million dollars instead? I'm not sure....but if they stay put at QB this year that might be a sign they'll want Matt Barkley in the 2013 Draft. And since you can't REALLY plan on picking first in a draft 15 or so months from now, getting a 2013 1st rounder
That extra 1st round pick might just the key for the Seahawks to get Griffin (as well as any other team that wants to trade up to that spot). I strongly believe the Browns made the Julio Jones trade last year as a way to get enough ammunition to trade up for Andrew Luck; with Luck essentially off the board, waiting another year for Barkley (might) make sense than trying to teach Griffin a Holmgren-ian WCO (also, they might not hate Colt McCoy as much as I do).
If the Browns don't draft Griffin and don't feel like trading down -- which is possible, I guess -- then the 5th pick belongs to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. They may be the team we end up trading with, because the next 3 teams drafting (the Washington Redskins, Jacksonville Jaguars and Miami Dolphins) all could strongly consider drafting a QB this year. The Redskins, BY FAR, are the biggest competitors to the Seahawks in getting Griffin. The QB situation in DC is abysmal, and short of signing the not-at-all-retiring Peyton Manning, Griffin would be the splashiest move splash-lover Dan Snyder could make. Blaine Gabbart couldn't be on more shakier ground in Jacksonville, and likes him he could probably be acquired for a song (and the Jags could then just draft his replacement, theoretically). The Dolphins also wouldn't let Griffin get past them, although Miami and new head coach Joe Philben are considered Matt Flynn's #1 destination.....although if I'm the Dolphins management, I question giving Flynn $50 million when you already have a not-dissimilar QB in Matt Moore, who looked more than just marginal in the 2nd half of last season.
After those teams you have the Panthers and Bills, who have just made big commitments to the QBs they already have, and maybe the Chiefs, if the coin flips against us (and I can't think of the last time KC made a big splash in the draft). As far as teams behind us that might want to trade up for Griffin, the Jets seem to be the most likely, if they decide to dump Mark Sanchez completely.....and maybe the Cowboys if they do the same with Tony Romo. I still refuse to believe the Cardinals would invest more in the QB position after giving up a 2nd round pick, and pretty good cornerback and $60 million to their BACKUP QB (and John Skelton looked pretty good this year, at times). No other team looks logically interested in Griffin.
We still have the Super Bowl, East-West Shrine Game, Senior Bowl (and any other college all-pro games I've forgotten about), the start of free agency/trades, the Indy Combine and individual school pro days to get through. We have PLENTY of time to debate the merits of acquiring Griffin as well as any other QBs the Seahawks could potentially be considering, and we can get to the draft thinking we have this whole thing figured out...and the Bucs take Griffen instead. Or something like that. I don't know what's going to happen at the 2012 NFL Draft, but I'm 99.9999999999999% sure Andrew Luck will be chosen #1 overall, and the Robert Griffin III will be the second QB chosen. Everything else is a just rampant speculation.
133 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Of course, I could be completely wrong.
If you care what Mel Kiper has to say, he thinks the Browns might actually TRADE UP to draft Griffin. He also says the Browns might go after Matt Flynn, so….this is probably nothing.
In my opinion, Griffin and the Browns are a bad match….but what do I know.
Kiper is a tool. I wouldn't believe any "anaylsis" he does.
"You are the molders of their dreams." - Clark Mollenhoff
by EequalsMc2 on Jan 21, 2012 5:04 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I agree with your "bad match" assessment
But it’s not just Kiper, I think I’ve read a lot of sources that say that they believe that the Browns are planning to take RG3. Of course these could all be off the same source, and it’s still a long ways to the draft, but it’s not like there’s just one outlet reporting that.
I sincerely hope they do trade up, but I’m not counting on it.
Trading up for a QB
In any year is not the walrus’ style, so I doubt he does it this year or next year for Barkley. He is a third round and develop them kinda guy.
they took turns pissing into the bitch's ocular cavities.
This way to the cafeteria!
My concern is that our offer won't stack up against those of Miami's or Redskins'.
Assume the worst case scenario: Browns take Flynn and Manning retires.
Colts take Luck with the 1st pick. As you said, lots of teams would be willing to trade up at 2 with the Rams – and considering that we’re picking at 12 versus Miami at 8 or Washington at 6, what picks can we give that the Rams won’t get with the same leverage against either teams? And more importantly, why would our rivals want to trade with us?
"You are the molders of their dreams." - Clark Mollenhoff
It's all a matter of who is willing to pay thye highest price.
The Redskins and Dolphins and even Browns may covet Griffin, but are they willing to give up their 1st round pick next season? How confident are they that they won’t give up a pick higher than the one they have right now? The Rams have greater concerns than turning down the best offer they get for the #2 pick just to spite a divisional rival.
Elite QBs don’t come cheap; I’m not saying that Robert Griffin is elite or not, but it’s pretty clear that he’’s the closest one that the Seahawks can get their talons on. You can either pray that the prize falls into your lap, or you can go out and grab it.
Trade that 2013 R1
If you are what your record says, then the Seahawks are the third best team in the NFCW. Also, we haven’t seen a winning record since 2007! There are a lot of factors that go into those cold, hard facts, but one common theme in these losing seasons has been piss poor quarterback play. The ’Hawks have built a pretty good foundation thus far. With the right QB under center, they could go from a dangerous team into a powerhouse.
My contribution to rampant speculation:
Colts-Luck
Browns-RG3
’Skins-Manning
Dolphins-Flynn
FA (possible) upgrades with a need for time to learn the system: Orten, Campbell
If the front office doesn’t like the options available in FA, a trade up to pick 3 is needed to upgrade the position. If all it would cost to nab our Point Guard of the Future is a Carpenter-esque draft pick, consider me all in.
...and if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump it's ass when it hopped.
This is how you end up with the talentless roster that Ruskell left us.
Picks don’t grow on trees.
What if it’s an Earl Thomas-esque draft pick? Earl Thomas makes the opposing QB worse every single Sunday? Lack of pass rush makes the other teams QB better. Bad LB coverage makes the other teams QB better. A dominant WR will make our QB better…..
If we burn 2 firsts on RGIII and he doesn’t work out, PC/JS are gone and we’re looking at another re-build in 3 years. Even if he did work out, we’d still be watching the other teams QB sit in the pocket all day, elite pass rushers don’t often shake out the 5th round either.
Absorbing the loss of a 1rst round pick is no trivial thing.
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 10:44 AM PST up reply actions 3 recs
1st round picks are cheaper than what they used to be.
And I think we’re going to go QB 1st and then a pass rushing DE/OLB 2nd.
"You are the molders of their dreams." - Clark Mollenhoff
My optimism
Has me valuing this pick as a playoff-team level selection, not in the #14 area. Also, This isn’t how you end up with Ruskell level talent on the field. You do that by missing on picks more than you hit. If RG3 didn’t work out, then obviously two #1s is expensive. If he becomes an elite QB, then there is no question that his value far exceeds 2 #1s. So, the goal is to accurately evaluate the talent available, and consistently make the right selection. It’s up to you if you want to hide behind the ghost of Ruskell. If you do your homework (well), and you see the value there, then you have to pull the trigger if you feel that your guy is there.
...and if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump it's ass when it hopped.
by Side Effects on Jan 22, 2012 11:49 AM PST up reply actions 7 recs
Ruskell actually found a trade partner that was a worse talent evaluator than he is.
McDaniels was in the process of tearing apart a pretty decent Broncos team. So, trading a 2009 R2 for a 2010 R1 turned out to be a GREAT move. I’m just glad Ruskell got canned before he could screw up that pick.
...and if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump it's ass when it hopped.
by Side Effects on Jan 23, 2012 12:02 PM PST up reply actions
Good article, but silly survey.
There are no trade scenarios for Luck that don’t involve, among other loot, our 2013 first round pick.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
I don't understand...there are no trade scenarios for Andrew Luck, period.
The poll was about drafting Robert Griffin III.
Sorry. Was thinking Griffin, wrote Luck.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
Okay, to respond to what you actually meant to say.
If GRIFFIN lased beyond St. Louis, Minnesota and Cleveland (unlikely, for sure), I think we could trade up to the #5 pick (or later) without giving up our 2013 1st rounder. Also, if the Dolphins, Browns and Redskins don’t pursue Griffin, the price to trade up probably goes down (but I still don’t he falls to pick 11).
Sounds about right.
A small stretch, probably, I think it might have to be down to 6th or 7th to cost only our 2nd, or something less than another 1st, and we’d have to pick 11th rather than 12th.
But it’s a minor detail. If we go for him, for all intents and purposes we’re giving up a 1st rounder, it’s the far, far most likely scenario. Of course one of these other QBs may rise up to be considered worth our 1st round pick straight up, like Osweiler. It’s not likely, but the likes of Rivers, Roethlisberger, Flacco and Dalton declared for the draft not expected by anyone to go as early as they did, but then they creep up. And I cite them specifically and exclude Ponder because where they were eventually drafted also matches what the consensus value of them became, while Ponder went early but very few of us thought he was worth that kind of pick.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Jan 25, 2012 10:35 AM PST up reply actions
I trade that 2013 pick today
That opinion might change, we have a full off-season which means we’ll see a period of free agency before the draft. The Peyton Manning and Matt Flynn scenarios have huge impacts on what we do. Kyle Orton and Jason Campbell also affect us to a lesser extent; meaning those scenarios might reduce leverage for the Rams but don’t necessarily destroy the need for the potential trading team.
Lots and ifs, buts, and maybes to play out, but right now, assuming PC and JS agree with my take on RG III, I absolutely have no problem letting go of that 2013 1st rounder.
I'd also have no problem trading away our first, especially since Pete and John have found a lot of gems in the later rounds.
"You are the molders of their dreams." - Clark Mollenhoff
My problem isn't with the trade per say
Its the fact that RGIII is the flavor of the day and not that much of a sure thing. He would be rated behind Barkley if he had come out and then we wouldn’t have to trade up much at all to get him. The value is the same, but the price changed. He is an amazing athlete and appears to be a great guy and a good clubhouse leader, but he is a one year wonder who made his yards against bad teams throwing bubble screens and bombs to one of the best WRs in the country. He may develop, but he will definitely need a couple of years on the bench to learn a pro offense. Some will point to Newton as a comparison, but Newton is a horse compared to RGIII. RGIII will not be able to take the punishment that Newton or Tebow take and will have to learn to be a conventional QB or he will end up injured all the time like Vick. I think there is a decent chance that he learns how to be a good QB based on his improvement going into this year, but trading a lot for him doesn’t seem like the best plan.
they took turns pissing into the bitch's ocular cavities.
This way to the cafeteria!
by stufr on Jan 22, 2012 4:43 AM PST reply actions 2 recs
this perfectly states my feelings about RGIII
though I have always been a big supporter, it was only if he ended up falling to us. I don’t agree with trading up for ANY player, this front office doesnt need it. We hit too often in the later rounds to warrant it. If anything, I’d like to see us trade down and snag a 3rd as well as a first in 3013 so we can get 2 firsts in the draft where we can select the person most of us wanted anyway in Barkley. Why trade a lot to get who seemed to be the 3rd (or even fourth as some put him behind jones) QB from this class.
Personally, I’m not about trading up for a QB that I’m not certain can translate into the pros but this is probably because I don’t like trading up anyway. If there was ayone that could balance it out i would say it would be Luck but that is still iffy. Too many QBs go high and bust simply because of the value of the position.
I trust PC/JS in making the right decision.
They won’t trade simply because they need to make a splash, persay Julio Jones to Atlanta. If they want somebody, no doubt they will try and get him.
"You are the molders of their dreams." - Clark Mollenhoff
Trading down
That seems smart, get a first rounder next year to make our move for Barkley, then draft a pass rusher DE with our next pick.
Wow is that unfair
The guy gave a marginal team a shot at winning a title. He is terrific and will be a great QB. I’m glad you aren’t a scout!!!
The only knock I’ve heard about him is footwork, and even that seems overblown to me. It’s always he has terrible footwork but we can train him. Yes I guess you always got to pick at something. He is a better athlete than Luck and the only reason he hasn’t got more attention is that he didn’t play for a team in the BCS title and that he has only played QB a few years.
Anyway – He will either be chosen by the Browns or he will be traded for two first round draft picks plus more. Considering all the whining that has gone on about how we don’t have a good QB, it would be crazy to pass on him if it were only two first round picks.
How is that unfair
He is a one year wonder. Look at his past years, they were marginal at best.
He made his name in the Big 12 running the spread. The history of QBs making the transition from that to the pro’s isn’t on his side.
I’m not as high on Luck as the rest of the nation, but he did play in a pro system and showed a consistent level of performance over multiple years.
These are all facts. He might succeed, but it will be despite these facts.
they took turns pissing into the bitch's ocular cavities.
This way to the cafeteria!
Really,
What about him makes you think he’s a better prospect than Matt Leinart, Jay Cutler, Jake Locker, Vince Young, Christian Ponder or any other upper/middle first round QB? You wanna burn 2 firsts for any of them?
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 11:16 AM PST up reply actions
Last year we know Pete was interested in him
He went back to Houston when he was told Tjax was the starter. Maybe this year Pete brings him in to compete with Tjax as the starter and then drafts Coleman or Davis to compete with Portis as QBoF
Where did you read this?
There was some rumors and projections but nothing definitive I saw that we wanted Leinert.
Thanks, missed all that
It is kind of amazing that Leinert didn’t want to compete with TJax, so he turned down an offer.
If we don't go after a 1st round QB
I’d be thrilled to go after Leinart as a potential backup. We’d probably pick him up for peanuts and pair him off against Whitehurst in the preseason. Even assuming we keep Whitehurst for that long, I’d have to assume he’s not making much more than veteran minimum and would be cut if Leinart shows even a modicum of ability.
"That's funny. I post here all the time and I never see (you) here."
- GreatGoogly, to John Morgan
"John Morgan IS Field Gulls, asshole!"
Dude, he was like, 'shit man, I got no chance against this Pro Bowl QB'
Heresy grows from idleness.
Why get Matt Flynn?
"Also, for what it’s worth, if we get Flynn, New England and Detroit are on the schedule!" - SSreporters
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 23, 2012 7:11 PM PST up reply actions
That wasn't it - I recall distinctly that Leinart dropped the Seahawks as an option...
…(even after he committed) when PC named TJax the starter.
There was going to be no competition at the position. This year, would be different, so perhaps Leinart reconsiders.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Naw dude, he woulda had to fight against the sheer BRILLIANCE that is Tjack
don’t look to closely at that QB, you’ll be BLINDED. You know, that’s the reason Leinart didn’t come. He looked too closely, and got blinded. So he couldn’t play football at all. So Houston signed him to a sympathy deal
Heresy grows from idleness.
Why get Matt Flynn?
"Also, for what it’s worth, if we get Flynn, New England and Detroit are on the schedule!" - SSreporters
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 23, 2012 7:30 PM PST up reply actions
It speaks poorly of his character, given that there have been questions of character
of this nature with Leinart from the beginning. It’s not like he had any chance to compete in Houston.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Jan 25, 2012 10:36 AM PST up reply actions
Doesn't tell me anything about his character.
Tells me he knows well enough that being TJ’s back-up is career suicide. If Leinart says yeah Pete, I’ll sign with Seattle…and Pete says: oh and by the way Matt, Tarvarious is the starter.
Yeah, that’s no deal. I would have told Pete to pound sand too.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
He also has a really good situation in Houston that he wasn't going to leave to be the back up somewhere else.
Apparently the Texans really believed in him or whatever and had worked with him a bunch, and he felt it was a good place for him to continue to work on getting his career back to where it should be. If the couple games he got in this season are any indication, it was a good call.
Leinart will find a team willing to give him the clipboard.
If I was a soon-to-be-free-agent QB, I’d be looking strongly at the Jets; Mark Sanchez’s job is almost-certainly the most unstable in the league.
You make a good point
regarding his value being static, but his price changing dramatically.
I honestly hadn’t thought about that and it’s making me rethink my support of trading up for RG3
I agree completely
Few on this board have the courage to get off the RG3 Kool-Aid. His performance in the Alamo Bowl was indicative of his game. All bubble screens, no passes to secondary receivers, no pocket awareness. Keith Price was clearly the better QB as his passes were down the middle to receivers in stride.
RG3 has along way to go to demonstrate he can translate his game to the NFL. He will not have Kendall Wright to throw to. In fact, I would rather draft Kendall Wright at #11 than RG3. He had a great supporting cast at Baylor and that made his numbers. Give me his RB Ganaway in round #3.
I have a complete man crush on Keith Price
And hope we can draft him in a couple of years, or next year, so that my bromance can grow.
He is good. Short, but he overcomes it well.
they took turns pissing into the bitch's ocular cavities.
This way to the cafeteria!
First off, fun article...
Second—and I know that I’m going to freak some folks out—is QB really such a huge need for us that we’re willing to risk a lot to obtain one?
What are our needs? Defensive line (particularly DE and a 3-tech DT) seems to be a strong need right now and one that could significantly shore up the rest of our defense. An upgrade at Mike/Will linebacker would be nice as well. I’d also say that we need depth at safety given how little we really know about Jeron Johnson and that we had to go outside our draft to get Atari Bigby. One could even make a case for quality depth at CB as well as we were ranked 10th vs #1 WRs and ranked 1st against #2 WRs and losing any portion of that would really be tough on us.
On offense I’m guessing we still are looking for O-line depth but I would put QB ahead of that need, especially the way we filled in nicely at the end of the season with 3 starters down. But O-line issues (experience, then health) are one of the primary reasons we couldn’t get Zach Miller going at all this season. And I’ll also go so far as to say that we need a solid backup to Marshawn Lynch (assuming he’ll re-sign) as our offense would look terrible without him (as noted in the Cleveland game).
Needs: DE, DT, QB, LB, CB, S, OL, RB in that order.
Am I smoking the crack?
QB is certainly a need
But like you pointed out, so is strength up front for our defense.
I’m torn because our very promising secondary won’t truly flourish until we get some pass-rush
But at the same time, not once did we see Tavaris Jackson march his team down the field when the team needed points. He made poor decisions, panicked, and just did not have the composure needed to win close games. Sure, his season stats look average, but I consider him to be one of the worst crunchtime QBs out there.
What happens if we have a great team on defense, and we’re deadlocked in a defensive game. We’re down 12 – 6 and need a TD to tie or win. I do not want Jackson to be the guy who we have to trust to reach deep down and make stuff happen. Why don’t I want this? Because he can’t do it.
Well, two things
1. The 2011 off-season was shortened by the lockout, meaning he didn’t have the rapport with his WRs the way one might expect. He did have this with Sidney Rice, however Rice only played in a handful of games. Also, when was the last time he got 1st team reps? The off-season of 2009 before Brett Favre was wheeled into Minnesota to take the job from him…
2. I wouldn’t discount the pectoral injury he had.
I would go QB/DE, DT, LB, RB
After that we’re looking for depth and upside wherever we can get it.
And this meme about TJ not marching down the field for the game winning score is unfair confirmation bias. You watch the highlights and see QBs do it on every Sunday, but they don’t show the countless failures of really good QBs to get it done. You forget the times when Brady goes out with a whimper and remember the times he pulls out the win. But you watch every Hawks game and live and die by the outcome, so you remember the failures for much longer.
Frankly, you’ll always feel this way about your QB unless you team is winning the SB.
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 11:32 AM PST up reply actions
I love pop-psych references
But I digress
People want to find reasons to not justify taking a shot at an unproven QB talent, but time and time again stats have been posted on this website showing that Tavaris Jackson’s ceiling is exactly what he showed all year long.
You’re right, only the QBs that put together game-winning drives end up on Sportscenter. That’s because they are winning. Tavaris Jackson does not win football games, especially the games that matter.
I think a whole lot more people are looking to value a college QB as a pro-bowler.
And trying to justify paying ridiculous cost by painting TJ as the worse QB in the world who is somehow scientifically proven to be unable to win a game because he went 0-4 on potential game winning drives. It’s not like we’re one player away from the Super Bowl and the QB is fucking it all up.
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 12:43 PM PST up reply actions
It is like we're one player away from the playoffs, though.
Even if Jackson was 50-50 in game-winning drives, we pick up two wins and end 9-7. Had the Cowboys won one of their games against the Giants, that puts us in, right? The Giants, like the 2005 Steelers, show us what can happen once you’re in. If we do stick with Jackson, we’re almost forced to get a #2 receiver with the 11th pick. Obomanu and Williams aren’t able to get enough separation or adjust when Jackson’s placement is unpredictable. With Rice on one side and Baldwin in the slot (not to mention Miller at TE), another weapon on the outside might make Jackson look good.
Ah, hello my slow fat fingers say to Lord Humongous
-Kingdomer
by EthelGemerman on Jan 23, 2012 9:03 AM PST up reply actions
QB is, BY FAR, the most important position in football. I can't emphasis that enough.
Tarvaris Jackson is a serviceable, yet fatally flawed QB that has no real future in this organization past 2012. We only signed him to a 2-year, approximately $8 million contract, though, and I actually believe he’s been worth every penny, as what he is: a temporary, stopgap solution.
The NFL, as it is currently constructed, is heavily biased towards passing, and there is a clear, distinct line between teams that are consistent Super Bowl contenders and teams that, at best, look really good every once in awhile; the 49ers might actually be an awesome team, but their current production is unsustainable with Alex Smith (unless he has truly made a concrete progression as a player that is essentially unheard of in the history of this league). Success = Awesome QB; it’s really that simple.
Again, I don’t know if Griffin is the answer for the Seahawks, or if he’s overrated or not, or ready to start for us in 2012 or 2013 and blah blah blah. The Seahawks have made zero attempts to acquire an “elite” quarterback for NINETEEN years (Hasselbeck doesn’t count….and neither does Drew Brees, if you think about it). Some teams fell ass-backwards into an awesome QB and it sucks and it’s unfair and such and such, but at some point you can’t cheapskate the most important position in the game, and you have to make a real INVESTMENT.
Pete Carroll isn’t going to coach forever; he needs to invest in the QB position this offseason, be it RG3 or somebody else. Yes, it is THAT important.
You're overrating the position.
It is the most important, but their value isn’t infinite. There is a point at which the price is too high. You always have to look for good value relative to the strength of your need. Just because Seahawk mediocrity correlates with lack of QB investment doesn’t mean you can fix it all by overspending.
Maybe it’s this important, or even This important, but THAT important? I’m skeptical.
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 11:49 AM PST up reply actions
An All-pro QB is DEFINITELY worth two 1st round picks.
I don’t know if RG3 is that guy or not, but if you believe that he is and don’t pony up….you’re only cheating yourself.
by J.L. White on Jan 22, 2012 11:53 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't know that that level of certitude can be applied to a college QB,
Outside of an Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning level prospect.
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 11:55 AM PST up reply actions
The last time an actual pro-bowl QB got traded,
it cost an experienced starting level nfl QB, 2 first round picks and a 3rd round pick.
And all it yielded was Jay Cutler. So yeah, pro-bowl QBs are worth a lot on the open market. But do you think the Bears are better off?
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 12:02 PM PST up reply actions
Yes; they just went to the NFC Championship game last year (and were 8-3 when Cutler got hurt).
And the Bears receivers are SHIT. Cutler was worth it, easily.
by J.L. White on Jan 22, 2012 12:06 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
But they weren't exactly terrible with Orton,
The could have Orton, and a 1rst round WR and 1rst round OL to help him out. Or Orton with Locker/Dalton getting groomed behind him and a 1rst round WR/OL. There is a lot of good those picks could have done them.
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
I have to correct myself,
The Bears were then, are now, and forever will be terrible.
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 12:58 PM PST up reply actions
And yet teams continue to use #1 overall picks on Cam Newton and Matthew Stafford and Eli Manning and (might not help my argument) Sam Bradford.
Fortune favors the bold, they say. If the Seahawks could get an elite QB without paying some kind of high price, then it’d be easy enough for all 32 teams in the league to have one. Life’s tough in the National Football League.
Outside of Eli Manning
Nobody payed more than 1 first round pick for them.
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 12:44 PM PST up reply actions
teams pay a 1st round pick for those college QBs
but no has paid 3 first rounders for one of them.
Not saying it might not be worth it, but 40+ years of NFL drafting suggest that every professional who has ever finagled a front office job was not willing to take that risk. So mortgaging the farm might be a bit more risky that the pro QBOTF crowd would have you believe. That being said, I trust our FO to continue to do everything they can (at a reasonable cost) to improve each and every position on the team..
Smashmouth is the new sexy!
Jeff Fisher does have a daughter
She went to Auburn. Not too shabby looking
I'm too important to this team. Big Stein can't be flopping and twitching.
Judge for yourself
For my money, the whole family is welcome in this division:
http://bit.ly/y2pj84
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
RGIII is a polarizing prospect
Some here have voiced their skepticism of his pro potential, but for me I believe this guy will be a super-duper star in the NFL. I would be willing to trade whatever pick or whatever picks are necessary to get him on this team.
Don't want to turn into GB though
Heresy grows from idleness.
Why get Matt Flynn?
"Also, for what it’s worth, if we get Flynn, New England and Detroit are on the schedule!" - SSreporters
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 22, 2012 11:36 AM PST up reply actions
RGIII is listed at 6'2"
Does that bother anyone else as much as it does me? I’m not a fan of QBs that have a hard time seeing over their line and take a special quality to find passing-lanes. Not everyone is Drew Brees…
...
Not really.
But then again I like Kellen Moore too. I’ll talk about in the next post.
"You are the molders of their dreams." - Clark Mollenhoff
Not as worried about it with his athletisism
He is going to be doing a lot of roll outs and bootlegs because he is dangerous out there.
they took turns pissing into the bitch's ocular cavities.
This way to the cafeteria!
NFL defenses are not going to let him out of the pocket
When he rolls out he cuts the field in half. Not a good idea. He has to learn to throw from in the pocket with the walls collapsing on him. He couldn’t do it in the Alamo Bowl. Shirley was all over him. Baylor went to a quick snap throw to the sidelines because RG3 cannot pick out targets over the middle. TJax is a pretty good runner also.
Rollout QBs can still be very dangerous.
Big Ben for one.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
Depends on the QB (and I believe it's less of a problem for "scrambling" QBs like RG3).
Drew Brees is only 6 feet even (so is Michael Vick); you either figure out a way to look over your linemen, or you don’t.
Physically speaking,
He’s Tarvaris Jackson.
by Fumanchuchu on Jan 22, 2012 11:53 AM PST up reply actions
We'll be bidding against Daniel Snyder.
And he always over-pays, and his franchise sucks because of it.
If we outbid a him, what does that mean about us?
Daniel Snyder will outbid for Peyton Manning.
"You are the molders of their dreams." - Clark Mollenhoff
by EequalsMc2 on Jan 22, 2012 11:58 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly; I don't think Snyder likes rookies, anyway.
The Redskins have rarely made a splash in the draft…..let’s hope that trend continues.
I trust Carroll and Schneider not to foolishly overspend on a QB.
Also, Snyder has never overspent for a QB before (unless you count that near-the-bottom-of-the-1st-round-pick he used on Jason Campbell many years ago). It’s possible that the Redskins won’t go out of their way for RB3. Nothing is set in stone.
This is true
You kind of can’t win a bidding war with Dan Snyder. Either way, you lose.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 22, 2012 8:04 PM PST up reply actions
I look at out like this..
We will forever pick in the mid-rounds because even at our worst, we will be competitive in the league.
With that said, we will have to make a move up in order to get a top QB prospect. RG3 is better than every QB (sans Newton) from last year, so it will take a move up to nab him.
While I trust our FO, it’s time to take off the gloves and get an elite prospect at the position. Please.
Ka-Kaaa!
by JerryNice on Jan 22, 2012 12:05 PM PST via mobile reply actions
*"look at it like this"
Ka-Kaaa!
by JerryNice on Jan 22, 2012 12:06 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Wheres the option of:
No, i want to use our 1st rnd pick on somethin useful like a DE/DT/LB and trade up in 2013 for barkely.
It’s gonna happen ppl.
by Dominic Matlock on Jan 22, 2012 12:22 PM PST reply actions
I strongly strongly believe we will not see any QB drafted this year.
Whitehurst will be gone Portis might be qb #2 but i think we will pick up a cheaper vet for #2 backup.
by Dominic Matlock on Jan 22, 2012 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
Poor QB play makes my face hurt.
Ka-Kaaa!
by JerryNice on Jan 22, 2012 1:07 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
it hurts mine as well but
Have we really been surprised last years draft and this year’s focus what Carol is doing? Apart from not resigning hasslebeck was there really any surprise curveballs we didnt see? No, i expect Matt to be back this year but that was the biggest surprise, he wanted to beef up the o-line what did we focus on in draft rnd1-2 o-linemen. Then we beefed up our Defense with LB/CB and other defensive guys.
Carol wants to focus on securing this defense, now, if RG3 is available at our pick does he get him? I’m pretty sure he would, but we all know that’s < 1% chance. We just have to deal with subpar QB play 1 more year, look at all the ELITE qbs 1 is left in the playoffs. Brady. Who is left? 9ers Defensive team, Giants Defensive team (historically tho eli is doin some pretty good things) and Ravens Defensive team Flaco is no elite qb. We don’t need that guy yet. 1 more year.
by Dominic Matlock on Jan 22, 2012 1:16 PM PST up reply actions
Would anyone trade 2 #1's and WR Baldwin for RGIII?
I’m trying to figure out the pain threshold that most would endure to get RGIII.
by parkinglotj on Jan 22, 2012 1:50 PM PST via mobile reply actions
The only way that I could be confident in him as a QBOTF
would be to sit through interviews and become confident that he is ready to read defenses in the NFL. That is the biggest leap that he has to make. I think he is athletic enough to learn the drop back and the physical part, but he has a lot of other growth to do. Before I trade two firsts and a pseudo first, I would have to be really sure.
they took turns pissing into the bitch's ocular cavities.
This way to the cafeteria!
Just trying to find out how much is too much if one thinks RGIII is the future
I hold Kam, Sherman and Wright higher in value because of the lack of depth at their positions. But I don’t see a lot of tradable players on the roster if a team wants more than draft picks.
Way too much.
Baldwin could be worth a first rounder himself in a couple years for all we know..
Ka-Kaaa!
2012 first, 2013 first and Baldwin?
Yes. Sorry, but yes.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
For Luck.
RG3 has bust written all over him.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Honestly Luck is so overhyped that I'm beginning to wonder if he's really that good.
"You are the molders of their dreams." - Clark Mollenhoff
He is (from what I hear)
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
He is no where near as good as his hype
But he is still good
they took turns pissing into the bitch's ocular cavities.
This way to the cafeteria!
Go ask Sherman and Baldwin.
They say he’s the real deal.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
.
Baldwin described him as a juggs machine hooked up to a computer. Also, he said that he thinks Luck can be the greatest ever. Pretty high praise.
...and if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump it's ass when it hopped.
by Side Effects on Jan 22, 2012 9:08 PM PST up reply actions
They're not talent evaluators
Not really relevant to cite.
But Luck is legit.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 23, 2012 3:44 PM PST up reply actions
I'll take their opinions over Kiper or any other
guy with a draft blog on the internet. But we all don’t value opinions in the same way.
Everybody loves Luck (new show on TV-maybe).
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
by hazbro24 on Jan 23, 2012 4:17 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I was thinking that Tate has improved
I feel that letting Baldwin go would be painful, but could be tolerated if it got us the QBotF. I’d obviously prefer giving up a 4th rounder to move up to get RGIII, but that’s just not gonna happen.
Durham is gonna be a factor next year along with Tate and Obo.
For Baldwin?
NEVER!!!
Dramatic Thunderclap!!!
"That's funny. I post here all the time and I never see (you) here."
- GreatGoogly, to John Morgan
"John Morgan IS Field Gulls, asshole!"
Another possibility, one that flows from the various QB scenarios.
I agree with those who question RGIII’s ability to transition to the NFL. Watching the Alamo bowl, he looked like a decent college QB to my untrained eyes. I didn’t see one legit NFL snap of his the entire game. Price on the other hand was amazing.
Anyway, if you figure Luck and RGIII get drafted by others than Seattle (say Indy and the Browns) and Snyder gets Manning, and the Dolphins sign Flynn, who else drafts a QB in the first 2 rounds? The Vikings can’t really plan on improving on Ponder, or the Jags necessarily on Gabbert. That means that Seattle can take the best player at 11/12 (and this amazing middle LB Kuekly is an interesting prospect) and then take Brock Osweiler in the second. In contrast to RGIII, Brock looks EXACTLY like an NFL QB, in his reads, his drop-backs and his throws.
Even if another QB gets drafted before Seattle’s second, it might be Tannehill, so Brock should still be available in the second.
On the other hand, if PC/JS really think RGIII is the real deal, they should make a play for him. They should make a play for Luck as well. If a trade is announced with the first pick, and Seattle steps up and drafts Luck, does anyone really care how much it costs? As long as core players aren’t involved, pretty much any number of picks would be worth it, IMO. What MIGHT make that trade feasible is if Luck goes all Elway on Indy (you may recall Elway refused to play for the then Baltimore Colts, forcing a trade to Denver. Five SBs later…) and he wants to play for a contending team (which Indy ain’t) and maybe stay on the west coast.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Realized (now)
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
The OSU and Iowa State games were worse.
You realize that the poor defense played by Baylor results in high scoring games and pads his QB ratings. He gets alot of extra possessions. Baylor also is forced to go for it on fourth down frequently. We saw this in the Alamo Bowl. The extra possessions improves his numbers across the board. Regardless, he relies too much on the bubble screen and four WR’s that are all track stars to make me comfortable he can easily transition to elite status in the NFL. I see an overrated, inexperienced kid that will struggle under center with DE’s in his face and CB’s manned up on his receivers.
There's no doubt his stats are padded.
But no one is expecting him to complete 73% of his passes and throw for 4,300 yards right away. That doesn’t mean he’s not a legitimate prospect. You can make these same type of argument for any quarterback. Andrew Luck relies too much on a dominant run game and 3 uber-talented tight ends that are half a foot taller than anyone on defense.
You're understating it
they’re freaking skyscrapers, haven’t you paid attention? It’s like trying to cover the Empire State Building.
Heresy grows from idleness.
Why get Matt Flynn?
"Also, for what it’s worth, if we get Flynn, New England and Detroit are on the schedule!" - SSreporters
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 23, 2012 11:03 AM PST up reply actions
Anyone else a fan of the idea to get Jason Campbell?
His contract is up and coming off an injury he’d probably be pretty cheap. He’s another stopgap QB, but an upgrade from TJack IMO. And as long as they draft a QB I would like where they’re sitting.
by SeattleAztec on Jan 23, 2012 12:57 AM PST via mobile reply actions
he's had twice as many starts as Tarvaris
and really hasn’t done anything more. My argument against Campbell is would you prefer his mediocrity to the mediocrity and continuity that Tarvaris offers?
Smashmouth is the new sexy!
A little competition at the QB position would be nice.
Cabel’s previous experience with Campbell gives the FO an advantage in scouting him. So, they should have a very accurate idea as to how he would fit in here. At least one QB will need to be added to the active roster for next year, so it will definitely be interesting to see the direction PC/JS choose to go.
...and if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump it's ass when it hopped.
by Side Effects on Jan 23, 2012 8:08 AM PST up reply actions
what continuity? sitting on the bench with the same OC for 4 years?
how about the discontinuity in his pectoralis muscle? the disconitinuity of joining a new team 10 days before the first preseason game, having to move across the country with a few days notice, only getting work with your injured, inexperienced, rookie, undisciplined, or career backup WRs for 6 days before the first preseason game, a new HC, a new OL coach and new blocking scheme, a new stable of RBs to handoff to and pass to, 9 out of 10 offensive starters you have never played with before, an offensive line where the 5 starters have never played a single game together, or the 3 starters who were completely new to the team, or the 3 OL starters who went out on IR in midseason…
Tarvaris has earned those relationships. Not saying he is the best going forward, but Campbell would have to come in an learn a new playbook and all of the stuff that Tarvaris already has under his belt. And Campbell has been just a shade of mediocrity better than Tarvaris over his carreer with twice as many chances, and surrounded by the same OL, RBs and WRs, even if the playbook was changing.
At least shoot for the moon. If you want a QBOTF, why would you argue that we should bring in a league average QB? Maybe the competition would be good, but I don’t see any other reason to bring in Campbell.
Smashmouth is the new sexy!
by pqlqi on Jan 23, 2012 3:58 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
rec'd for 'pectoralis'
weird how it sounds like penis to me
Heresy grows from idleness.
Why get Matt Flynn?
"Also, for what it’s worth, if we get Flynn, New England and Detroit are on the schedule!" - SSreporters
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 23, 2012 7:13 PM PST up reply actions
Wasn't really arguing for Campbell.
But come on, Jackson’s had the same coordinator for ages.
That lack of continuity that came from not playing together didn’t seem to hurt the running game, despite most of the parts never having played in Bevell’s system or with each other (or at all, considering how many of them were rookies and/or backups).
I had been a bit of a fan of Jason Campbell as a prospect
for Washington for several years. While he foundered and the NFC East rivals laughed, calling him a bust, I saw some very impressive mechanics and footwork. He had the prototypical athletic makeup of a QB and he was quite the technician as a dropback passer. I never watched him close enough to figure out exactly why he hasn’t succeeded more, but I saw enough to know he’s not really an upgrade. Jackson has poor mechanics and sometimes that defeats plays, but he’s more capable of capitalizing on plays that open up down field than Campbell is. There’s really no use to it.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Jan 25, 2012 10:43 AM PST up reply actions
Totally Comfortable trading two first and a 2nd or 3rd for RG3
Obviously hes no guarantee and according to some scouts has flawed mechanics but I believe its a risk worth taking. This as close to a complete team as the 05’ season (assuming everyones healthy) and look at JS/PC success with late round picks/UDFA I have complete faith that even if we don’t have some high picks we’ll be able to draft a few starters in later rounds.
I often don't think a lot about the ramifications of anything I do - Will Ferrell
I'd rather wait
Build a team that Charlie Whitehurst could win 10 games with and then get our high round QB
by central_scrutinizer on Jan 23, 2012 10:42 PM PST reply actions
There are more than just 2 QBs in this draft
I know most know about him, but Rob over at Seahawks draft blog does really good work. I would rather go Brock Osweiler, or Cousins than use all of our picks for RG3. Don’t get me wrong I like him but there are more QBs to look at.
Great article and intense conversation. Good job.
by spokahawk on Jan 24, 2012 3:58 PM PST via Android app reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
Related FanShots on Field Gulls
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
