Sam Greenwood - Getty Images
9 months ago: JACKSONVILLE, FL - SEPTEMBER 01: Quarterback Sam Bradford #8 of the St. Louis Rams attempts a pass during a game against the Jacksonville Jaguars at EverBank Field on September 1, 2011 in Jacksonville, Florida. (Photo by Sam Greenwood/Getty Images)
The title may seem shocking to some, but could this ever happen? This is the NFL we are talking about, and we all know, anything can happen in the NFL(see Raiders trade for Carson Palmer). The Saint Louis Rams are in a very unique position in the 2012 NFL Draft, and it could just take some creativity from new head coach Jeff Fisher to make the splash this team needs.

A new regime in St. Louis:
Any time a new coach and GM enter, you can expect change. Some is subtle, some is brash. We all know by now that Jeff Fisher was named the new coach of the Rams, replacing the fired Steve Spagnuolo. The Rams have yet to name a new GM, but they are moving towards doing so within the next two weeks, and that new GM will need to get Jeff Fisher's stamp of approval. So, in essence, Jeff Fisher is running the team from a football operations standpoint.
The missing piece in D.C.:
It's pretty obvious that we are lacking on the offensive side of the football. HogsHaven author Matt Ford provided us with a great article yesterday, as to why we need to do anything we can to trade up in the 2012 NFL Draft for RG3. Matt made some great points in his article, and may have swayed some of the fans to his beliefs. Either way, I think we can all agree that a changing of the guard at quarterback is a must need in D.C.
What no one is talking about:
We have heard trade-up talks for RG3. We have heard trade-back talks, similar to last year, for additional picks to fill other areas of need. We have even heard the sit tight, and draft another left tackle prospect at pick number six. All of these arguments have some merit.
Here is a thought that has been mentioned, but not heavily discussed: RG3 goes to the Rams, and Sam Bradford becomes a Redskin.
Why this could happen:
Let's just assume, that in his year away from coaching, Jeff Fisher watched a lot of college football, scouting many of the quarterbacks in this year's draft class. Let's also assume that Jeff Fisher is human, and like most others, may see a new breed of signal caller in RG3. Fisher has no ties to Sam Bradford, as he was not responsible for drafting or developing him. He has however, come out and said that he has great admiration for Bradford, and thinks a change will do him good. Could that change be in the type of system that Fisher runs, or could that be a new start, with a different team?
If Fisher decides he wants RG3, and convinces his new boss, and GM to pull the trigger on drafting him number two overall, they would most certainly look to move Sam Bradford in a trade. Mike Shanahan has not held back in his praise of Sam Bradford. It is rumored that Shanahan made an attempt to trade up to acquire Bradford's talents in the 2010 NFL Draft. Instead, we ended up with left tackle Trent Williams. Bradford went on to a good rookie season, being named NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year.
For both teams, this could be a match made in football heaven.
The compensation:
This is the tough part. The Rams can benefit from a new start, championed by two great leaders in Fisher and RG3. Since they spent the number one overall pick on Sam Bradford just two seasons ago, they are going to want something substantial in return. We have to assume that getting out from under the large contract Bradford signed his rookie year, and moving into a more cap friendly deal with RG3 is going to carry some weight in the decision. The Rams could also benefit from some extra draft picks to fill other position of need on their team.
Here are two possible scenarios:
1) The Redskins trade their number one picks in 2012 and 2013, in exchange for Bradford. We get our franchise quarterback, and still have the remainder of our picks this year to get an offensive tackle, wide reciever, offensive guard/center, etc.......We are without our first in 2013, but had Shanny made a trade in 2010 to move up for Bradford, we likely would have been without our 2011 first round pick, so we could kiss Kerrigan goodbye.
2) The Redskins give up their second and one fourth round pick in 2012, and their first in 2013, plus Laron Landry, in exchange for Bradford. We keep our first this year, with which we can now take best available, and still have our second and third in 2013 to add quality depth. Obviously, in this scenario, the Redskins would have to re-sign Landry to a multi-year deal, and he would certainly have to check out medically.
Either way, we get our quarterback of the future!
0 recs | 247 comments
Question on Landry
Can we franchise and trade him? Is that allowed?
If so, couldn’t that be a huge point of leverage for the Skins in trade talks?
Hustler of Culture - February 3, 2012
it's not supposed to happen and is frowned upon but it does happen
the problem is we’d have to make the decision to franchise Landry well before any trade could be worked out. So if we can’t deal him we’d be stuck with him and he’d eat up a huge portion of our cap.
Also, I really don’t see Landry having much trade value given the injuries and the contract (if you franchise him, it would force another team to offer him good money).
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Even though I cannot see this happening...
it would be great. Possible scenario #1 would be preferred.
jgibbsfan1 - February 3, 2012
These deals just don't transpire.
Would love for him to end up in Washington but it isn’t very realistic. Not saying it can’t happen but it would be very complicated to move him IMO. I firmly believe Fisher came to St. Louis because of Bradford.
xocnodnarb - February 3, 2012
well he could have come to STL to have the #2 pick
Gives him more options to decide on what to do at QB
prc805 - February 3, 2012
I kind of think so too
especially the was Fisher has talked about Sam in interviews, but again, you just never know.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
I don't think the 2nd scenario is reasonable
No way the Rams trade Bradford without getting a 1st this year, as getting a 1st next year does them little good in adding protection or weapons for Griffin.
Also sign and trades don’t really work in the NFL Why would the Rams trade for Landry when they can just sign him? And why would Landry sign here if the Redskins might trade him. Washington could franchise him and then deal him, but in addition to it being frowned upon, it would be a huge risk for the Redskins.
Finally, Landry doesn’t have that much trade value given the injuries and contract that you’d need to sign him to.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
I would not mind a bit.
It seems kind of weird the way they talk it may happen. I just want a new young QB is that to much to ask.
trueredskinm - February 3, 2012 via mobile
no, and you definitly in the majority
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
i would give them rex grossmen, our first and the extra 4th for him nothing more
munson21502 - February 3, 2012
I voted no
While I like Bradford and think he could succeed in the right situation, it isn’t worth it in my book.
Bradford’s contract would really eat up the Skins cap room, and would be even worse for Washington than Matt Flynn’s deal. On top of that the Redskins would have to give up 2 1sts (or the equivalent) meaning they’d have to replace those players with either lesser options and/or more expensive ones.
Finally, Bradford as we’ve seen struggles when he doesn’t have weapons or protection. The Skins might be slightly better in that department than the Rams, but they’d actually be worse off if this trade was made since we’d no longer have our first to fix some of those needs.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
I agree
but if he came with a restuctured contract I would say yes
also to add to this a scenario that is even more likely is cleveland trading there 1st round pics for bradford. this is actually a much better deal for the rams to where they could draft rg3 and blackmon possibly . that of course would leave us S.O.L so lets all hope that this doesnt happen
taylor21 - February 3, 2012
I don't think Mike Holmgren is as desperate
for a new QB as people are making it out.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
+10000
mkjo - February 3, 2012
why would Holmgren be less desperate than Shanny and the Skins?
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
I would think that Cleveland offering the 4th pick straight up would do the trick
I could see Holmgren doing this before Shanny simply because of their extra picks this year
Bryan Black - February 3, 2012 via Android app
might cost a bit more
but yeah they could be an option.
my point was people say things like the Browns won’t trade up for RGIII, or Bradford b/c Holmgren isn’t as desperate or something of that ilk. Yet Holmgren has won less games in Cleveland than the Skins have, and has a more established team and more picks to work with.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
If you was in control with the Browns
would you trade both 1st #4,#22, 2nd #37 and maybe a 4th to move up 2 spots ??
Cause i would not i would be thrilled any way the draft shake out the worst case scenario would be if Rams took Blackmon and Vikes trade pick and RG3 is gone, but then i would still end up with “The Beast” Trent Richardson. And if Blackmon fell to me @ 4 i could trade back to maybe 7 with the Jags and may pick up their 2nd and a 2013 1st rd pick.
Highspeed30 - February 3, 2012
why would it cost that much for the Browns?
if the Redskins had to pay the same cost, it would be their 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks from each of the next two drafts, plus a 4th this year.
And what is the worst possible scenario for the Redskins? They get one of Reiff, Blackmon, Claiborne, and could trade back as well.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
If you was in control of the Browns would you
trade both 1st #4, #22 and #37??? like i said i wouldn’t. If I was the Redskins and had the 4th pick and the Browns had the 6th pick and everything is the same as far as picks concern (the Browns got 2 1st). If i was in control at Redskins park i would not look to trade up because i would have way more options at the 4 spot. If the Browns traded up ahead of me then that mean I would get Blackmon or have the option to trade back cause i know there would be at least 3 teams that would like to have him and probably be able to get a 2nd this year and a 2013 1st. or if not i would just take Griffin III at 4. But as it stands now Blackmon probably wont fall to 6th and the other guys that will be there is not highly sought after to get a good trade back offer, so the Redskins dont have that many options I am not taking a RT with the 6th pick, even if you want to say move Trent to the Right side you are still addressing the right side cause you already got a LT
Highspeed30 - February 4, 2012
But Bradford has zero reason to restructure his contract
he’s not an option to be cut given the guaranteed money, so he either plays there or somewhere else under that deal.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
I've heard this to be a distinct possibility and something the Skins are actively pursuing...
…from another website with a guy that has sources within Ashburn. (I know it sounds suspect, but I believe him.) Apparently, the Skins are actively targeting Luck and Bradford and expect to get one or the other.
mbedner - February 3, 2012
For some reason the link didn't transfer
http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/46419-i-see-qb-rumors-2012-qb.html
mbedner - February 3, 2012
IMHO - Nothing these guys say makes sense
Been listening to the wrong people.
Donnio1234 - February 3, 2012
Why is that?
mbedner - February 3, 2012
Hmm...
All three teams involved could get their QB’s and everyone is happy. Would be an unprecedented trade but this is very interesting to say the least. Insane, but interesting.
xocnodnarb - February 3, 2012
I trust what he says, too. He really seems to have a ton of experience (15 years in the field).
mbedner - February 3, 2012
He said Colt McCoy to us
god, I hope that was a joke. I almost threw up in my mouth
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Yeah, Colt McCoy would not be ideal, but I like the idea of Bradford or Luck.
Though, both options are going to be costly and highly unlikely….
mbedner - February 3, 2012
I've always maintained we have a shot with Luck
everyone has written him off, but I’m not doing so until I hear that he’s been drafted by Indy.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
You meant SIGNED with Indy.
Remember, Eli Manning was the #1 draft pick of the San Diego Chargers. John Elway was the #1 draft pick of the Balitmore Colts.
BillWard - February 3, 2012
keeping hope alive...
jgibbsfan1 - February 3, 2012
Shanny is flying under the radar again
He’s stealthy about this stuff, gotta give him credit. If Manning is healthy and can play no way Indy releases him…I sense a lot of loyalty there
Bryan Black - February 3, 2012 via Android app
Very interesting
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
I would love to get Luck
But I wouldn’t put too much into that
travisjh86 - February 3, 2012
Worth a discussion
But I don’t see the Rams trading Bradford, he wasn’t the problem in STL, and changing to RG3 isn’t going to help them either. IMO
Alex35332 - February 3, 2012
But it gives them more picks and a better place to grow. If I were the rams, I'd take that trade...
mbedner - February 3, 2012
What a great position STL is in though...
They could very well draft Griffin and on top of that get a galore of picks from another team. It would set them up big time. Just seems a bit too complicated and unlikely at this point.
xocnodnarb - February 3, 2012
Would never happen.
I wish that was a voting option
SSBlitz - February 3, 2012
I said this in January and YOU along with a lot of other people on here called me crazy,
and now you write an article supporting it.
Unreal…
Obey - February 3, 2012
Is that even a question?
The guy Shanny wanted last year, who became Rookie of the Year? Tremendous potential. Sam Bradford to the Redskins would make me happier, yes happier, than RGIII.
Andrew DeFrank - February 3, 2012
Who also had a year last year that was worse than Grossmans
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Good point
Bryan Black - February 3, 2012 via Android app
Jeff Fisher said it isn't happening
Kevin Ewoldt - February 3, 2012
I never really believe anyone in the NFL
Everyone has their price and it could very likely be a smokescreen.
mbedner - February 3, 2012
Link?
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
you can read about it here
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
I typed in Jeff Fisher, draft pick and here's what I got:
Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bernie-miklasz/bernie-bytes-fisher-and-the-no-draft-pick/article_c691f0f2-4e6f-11e1-8874-0019bb30f31a.html#ixzz1lLhgadAu
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
I dont see anywhere in here where he says "we're not trading Sam Bradford"
which is actually what I was replying to from Kev’s comment above.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
You said:
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
where did I say this?
UK said this
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
Yes, and that was from what UK said
you were posting your info above from the “link ?” I posted to Kevin
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
and...
We are never picking sixth again.
TheSportsManager - February 3, 2012
Nick Saban also said he was not going to be the next coach at Alabama
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Speaking of Nick Saban, didn't you say he was interested in leaving Alabama for Penn State?
Obey - February 3, 2012
Don't you have work or something
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
I would absolutely be open to this.
Bradford is a legit franchise QB. However, Jeff Fisher has come out and said the number 2 pick is up for grabs, effectively saying they aren’t drafting RG3. Bradford is a big reason Fisher went to St. Louis.
UkRedskin - February 3, 2012
Can someone provide a link? I’ve been looking, and can’t find this.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
I saw it on twitter, also I say from DC Sports Bog that the Skins were linked to Kyle Orton.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
I'm not sure what to believe. The Skins have been linked to everyone.
mbedner - February 3, 2012
True
as we always seem to be
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
More so now than ever though. Its just the smoke machine starting up
mbedner - February 3, 2012
haha
that good ole smoke machine has provided us Redskins fans with some fun over the yeras.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Kyle Orton. Ew.
I hope that is inaccurate.
xocnodnarb - February 3, 2012
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/playerbreakingnews.asp?sport=NFL&id=7410&line=227412&spln=1
believe_the_curse - February 3, 2012 via mobile
I see the words "open to trading"
not the pick is up for grabs
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
semantics
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
Every team in the NFL is "open" to trading
if the price is right
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
So why do you want a link so bad then if its general knowledge?
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
cause someone said the pick was "up for grabs"
and I had not seen that said by the Rams, so I wanted to see if I had missed something.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Also I have some breaking news: Former NCCU player Jovan Olafioye signed a 2 year deal with the Rams!
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
I had a philly chessesteak for lunch
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
I had a good poop today.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
So you had the Philly Cheesesteak, too?
BillWard - February 3, 2012
nicely done
MagicHat - February 3, 2012
The post is on Profootballtalk.com
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/03/fisher-rams-move-with-no-2-pick-will-define-the-future-of-the-franchise/
Fisher said they are happy with Bradford and if you goto the link in the PFT post, it has many coaches saying Fisher went to the Rams because Bradford was there.
1footballguru - February 3, 2012
actually two coaches who know Fisher well, Dick V and Herm Edwards. The luck option is very interesting.
How crazy is this draft going to be!
1footballguru - February 3, 2012
The entire offseason will be crazy.
xocnodnarb - February 3, 2012
I actually agree
but this is the NFL, and you take Coach Speak with a grain of salt.
I just din’t know if he actually made a statement saying “we are not trading Bradford”.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
If the redskins would just sign jevale mcgee
We could just keep grossman and take the bpa at #6
believe_the_curse - February 3, 2012 via mobile
I hope Snyder is sending Fisher a diamond mustache trimmer.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
He sending him a Verticoli
first person to get what “Verticolo” is and wher it came from gets a prize.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
The whalebone brush from blades of glory
Nailed it!
mbedner - February 3, 2012
Nailed it! Nice
what would you like as your prize?
1) autographed copy of my head shot from Abercrombie
2) a wrist band I wore to spinning class this morning
3) my bootleg copy of “New Moon”
4) the Glee Christmas CD
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
I'll go with the "New Moon" bootleg
That way I’ll have my Hogs Haven White Elephant gift picked out for H8 next year.
mbedner - February 3, 2012
*Disclaimer*
Just to make it clear, this is an employee ID photo
Obey - February 3, 2012
haha
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
God
you know so much about me it’s scarry
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
I found it here
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
The Silverback
will get Bradford killed again.
2up2down - February 3, 2012 via mobile
Why no faith in TW
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Outside the pot, I think he’s best suited at RT a la College.
2up2down - February 3, 2012 via mobile
You wont find a tackle in football with quicker feet than TW
I think his talent may be wasted on the right side. Not to mention what it would do to his ego.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
You wont find a LT in the game that’s one drug test from missing the year. At this point he’s still a player of athleticism than substance. If his ego gets hurt by moving to RT than he still has a long way to go maturity wise, but imo I think he’ll do whatever the coaches want.
2up2down - February 3, 2012 via mobile
quick feet don't matter that much if you don't do much with it
Until TW shows the consistency and discipline to be a top tier LT, he deserves RT consideration.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
disagree
too early for that
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
actually its too early to put him at LT if he is below average there
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
I agree. We should compare him to Okung. Anyone have the stats to determine if TW is any good comparatively?
mbedner - February 3, 2012
you should have to earn the LT spot, not have it handed to you b/c every other option is god awful
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Who else is going to take it from him on our team? Honestly
mbedner - February 3, 2012
haha.....good point
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
that is the point the Redskins have done our offense (and TW) a disservice of being so poorly constructed that it forced him into a position before he was ready
now given what we’ve had, yes TW should have lined up at LT, but that doesn’t mean he deserves it.
Just b/c a pitcher is a team’s top starter, doesn’t make him a true ‘number 1’
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Why is ok for other teams to give rookie tackles the LT spot?
Saffold – Rams is one that comes to mind
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
i'm not saying its a bad thing
i’m just saying a player has to earn it. TW giving up 11.5 sacks as a rookie didn’t really earn it.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
I'm sure there have been worse
Also don’t forget, a good QB can make his linemen look better. We have not had the luxury of a good QB
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
McNabb was supposed to be that franchise guy
and I agree a good QB can make a line look better (example Peyton), but when you actually breakdown a line or a lineman and take the QB out of the equation that is where things aren’t too promising for TW. Many of his sacks and pressures come simply from his man beating him, not b/c the QB held on for too long.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
But he usually get's beat across his face
which tells me it’d not his ability, but rather his tech, and him guessing too much. These things are coachable, and come with time.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
that's not exactly a good thing or an easy fix
getting beaten across your face means you are conceding the quickest path to the QB.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
or guessing incorrectly
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
i don't know how much it is guessing
why he’d allow so many guys come across him is striking. I would say that shows a lack of work, either on the field and/or in the film room.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
The big problem is not being able to handle the speed around the edge
TW does pretty well here. He needs to work on his hand placement, and of course his balance on his kick-slide.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
So did Peyton Manning not "earn" it when he threw all of those picks as a rookie?
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
Manning's rookie numbers were still extremely impressive even with the picks
and no one questioned whether he could do the job.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
But who's questioning Trent Williams' ability?
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
me for one
numerous other posters. Also, in the say drafting Reiff camp you are fixing two positions, as Reiff profiles better than TW at LT, and TW should be a very good RT.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Oh, well if it's you and numerous other posters then...
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
i know most people ignore the offensive line
or judge people based on reputations (i.e. all those people who thought resigning Jamaal Brown was a good idea), but collectively those 5 guys mean more to an offense than the 5 collective skill positions.
TW hasn’t been good in two years, sure he’s flashed some really good games, but so has Ryan Torain doesn’t make him a top level RB.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Here is where I'm confused
haven’t we seen what Shanny can do with his linemen in the past? Hell, it’s what made him famous. Why can’t we as fans believe he knows what he’s doing on the O-Line front?
They obviously saw something in Brown they liked to have re-signed him. They obviously saw things they liked in Hurt and Smith to have started them as rookies over other(albiet very limited)options. If i’m not mistaken, didn’t Willie Smith beat out Locklear?
Why is it we always say the line was so bad, in reality, over the last 6 weeks of the season, it improved greatly as a unit; and this was without TW and Licht(and Brown for some part too).
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Because, they can't believe that someone we signed/drafted can be any good.
The only viable options for our line are named Grubbs, Nicks and Myers.
Willie Smith’s performance was a farce. Kory can’t be that good.
TW gave up 11 sacks his rookie year.
They all need to be cut. Shanahan is an idiot.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
ai said Kory was good when he was signed in 2010
and people laughed. Until injury, he was our best linemen. He was also drafted by Shanahan, so he obviously liked what he saw from him early in his career, enough to bring him over to DC as his first FA signing.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
not in 2010 he wasn't, he was awful that year
and yes for the first 4 games he was our best offensive line man (still not a high water mark), but that is a pretty small sample size, especially when it includes the Cards and Rams, two teams not known for their interior presence.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Yes I do believe they can be good, thanks for bringing that up
The key to NFL is depth. H8, the Redskins could dress out Ken’s mom at right guard and you would blindly support them as a Redskin. You’d probably vote her in for the Pro Bowl 20+ times. Look at things objectively for once.
Depth is key. No one is saying TW can’t play, we’re just saying he’s not a playing like a Top 5 tackle right now and may be better suited for the right side, and we would like DRAFT another person for the left side.
I’m glad guys like Hurt and Smith got some PT. But for that reason alone they shouldn’t be paraded around as the future. They, rather, should be looked at as good options for depth to offensive line.
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
I'm not crowning Hurt or Smith as an All-Pro.
I’m not saying that about Kory either. What I’m saying is that this fan base is so cynical, we find it hard to see talent through the losses.
It’s inconceivable to a lot of Skins fans to even entertain the thought that an UDFA might work out for us.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
This fanbase overhypes their talent more than any other.
Leonard Hankerson was a Hall of Famer on May 1 last year. You think Roy Helu is the second coming of Christ. People buy jerseys like Chris Horton that shouldn’t even be sold.
Don’t mistake cynics for realist. A lot of us used to happy go lucky, filled with blind faith and ridiculous optimism every offseason. Hell, I was just 2 or 3 years ago. But continually sucking for 20 years starts to pay its toll and the fanbase is becoming more realistic for once and trying to do things the right way.
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
I agree with that.
And I bandwagon behind players more than anybody.
There is also a group of fans that still has Shuler Syndrome and feels like any QB we take high will be a bust and every FA will be Haynesworth.
I’m as hopeless now as I ever was about this team. Rex Grossman killed my spirit.
That doesn’t make me afraid to want to see the team take a risk now and then, or believe that Helu or Willie Smith will be good NFL players.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
no Willie Smith's performance showed that he shouldn't be starting
if it was a farce it would be the opposite
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
why isn't the same consideration given to Shanny's QB's or WR's
Shanny turned Rod Smith, Shannon Sharpe and Ed McCaffery into an elite receiving unit. None of those guys were top level picks or signings.
Shanahan also rebooted Jake Plummer’s career, and never drafted a QB in the top 10 of the draft.
Brown was awful, he was awful in 2010 and he was even worse last year.
Smith and Hurt played b/c Shanny had no better options, it is the same reason why Rex Grossman replaced McNabb and battled it out with the Beckster. Willie Smith ‘beating’ out Locklear isn’t exactly a high water mark, and I have no problem with playing him there when the season is over. But he also showed that he was well in over his head.
And did we play that much better in the last 6 games? In 247 pass blocking snaps our line allowed 6 sacks, 22 hits and 41 pressures. Those numbers are pretty bad. Yes are running numbers improved, but they weren’t perfect, for example against the Giants our backs averged under 3 yards per carry.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
We also won that game and the Giants are playing in the Superbowl in two days.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
BIG PICTURE
Get away from the homer atta’ boys. We need to win 10 games per year, it doesn’t matter who they are against.
Our players need to evaluated based on their whole season not a particular instance.
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
OK, so is it better for all of our players to perform great individually in a loss,
or get their asses kicked in a win?
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
Yep that's exactly what I'm saying
Having discussion with you is like playing that game telephone in elementary school. Someone types something then it somehow goes through 12 different other personalities in your brain and somehow gets spitten out like this.
I’m tired of people saying stuff like “if the Giants win then we would have beaten the SB champs the past two years.” WHO CARES.
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
Well that's ridiculous.
You just said we need to get to 10 wins. If we do so and our backs are getting 3 yards a pop, or trent Williams is sucking, who cares?
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
I care, b/c you're always looking to improve.
No matter what. In your scenario of 3 yards and TW, I’d be looking to improve the line even if we won the SB that year.
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
if those things are occurring it decreases our chances of 10 wins again
maybe you catch lightening in a bottle one year, but the teams that contend every year and have 10+ wins, don’t have major holes like you are suggesting.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
long term great individually in a loss
Look we lost those games where Helu and Royster were running wild. Would we be so confident with our running game if they continued to average under 3 yards a carry if we won those games?
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
yes we did
but that doesn’t mean our o-line was playing at a high level. It just means that we succeeded in other areas. Esp. on defense in that game.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
There has been a strong contingent for moving him to RT, hence questioning his ability
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
Until that "strong contingent" consists of someone with the last name Shanahan, then I'll take it seriously.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
Noted Redskins fan, Mortimer Shanahan-Goldstein....
…was apart of the strong contingent to move Trent to the RT position. Will you take them seriously now?
mbedner - February 3, 2012
I don't like people with hyphenated last names.
So no.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
Neither do I.
especially since Mortimer took his wife’s last name.
mbedner - February 3, 2012
so if one of the Shanny's wants to bring Rex back you are okay with it?
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Hell no, but that's different.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
how is that different?
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
b/c he wants it to be
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
Haha. Strong contingent consists of bloggers from various sites that don’t know football
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
+1,000
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
So you and me?
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
Don't lump me in there
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
O ok so just Steve and myself then?
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
they seem to recognize when a player is failing so that seems to have at least some football knowledge
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
So you move Trent to RT so a Rookie
Reiff or Martin be inserted and have to learn the pro game??? and might not be as good as TW that make a lot of sense
Highspeed30 - February 3, 2012
I think Reiff could step in no problem
he’s a better prospect than TW was, and has run in a pro style system that uses a lot of ZBS in college.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
but that is not saying he would be a upgrade over TW
it is not like TW is a total bust, and his sample size is so small, he got to have a least another year before you can make that type of determination. with the benefit of a full offseason he should take another step
Highspeed30 - February 3, 2012
and if he does great
but we can’t just keep wishing and hoping.
If TW ever fully gets it, than he can earn that job from Reiff, if not then the Redskins aren’t screwed.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Ferentz does not use much ZBS at all
they are more of a “rule” team.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
they ran a fair amount of zone plays this season
i honestly didn’t count it up, but it def. is a significant portion, even if it isn’t their primary running scheme.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
They may run the occassional stretch
but they are definitly not a zone team. They pull a lot of their linemen, and play more power football. Traps, counters, etc.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
i don't know if i fully agree, but it really isn't the point
Reiff is a great fit for the ZBS system, and comes from a pro style system.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
The pro style system has little to do with him being a fit in a ZBS
it’s really two different philosophies of line coaching.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
no it has a fit with him being NFL ready
the fact that Reiff is super athletic, does play at least some ZBS, moves well in space, and grades out as great across the board makes him a great fit for the ZBS.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
I also see Reiff getting beat in college
the same way TW does in the NFL……accross his face
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
you saying you are gonna give Reiff the LT spot
but you thought TW should have earned it. you cant just say that Reiff is better than TW, when he has not played in the NFL
Highspeed30 - February 3, 2012
I never said this
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
he'd obviously have to beat out TW
but right now that isn’t exactly a tough thing to do.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
well since Reiff rarely gets beat i'll take it
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Watch this
then tell me Reiff never gets beat.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmS0XmkMeJ0
This is one team, and not a good defensive one at that, and he gets beaten accross his face 3 x
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
He also gives up 2 sacks(should have been 3)
misses badly on 3 cut blocks, and is seen holding at least twice.
Again, Oklahoma is not a good defensive team.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
WHAT?
seriously…first off you showed a video that does show that Iowa runs a fair amount of zone plays.
the first sack was def. his fault. The 2nd one, he had the anchor against Alexander, for some reason Vandenberg ran right to Alexander was. I’m not sure what play you are talking about for the ‘should have been 3rd sack’, and the holding penalties you’d have to point them out since they weren’t called and obviously not egregious.
Steve Shoup - February 4, 2012
TW played in a ZBS at Oklahoma.
Jefferson1935 - February 3, 2012
true but he also played RT there
and it is more of a spread attack so the pass blocking principals aren’t as advanced as what Reiff played in.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
He played left also
after Loadenholdt left
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Loadholt is larger than TW (6'8" & 332 lbs). He ended
up playing RT with the Vikings. With Peterson at RB that team probably wanted stronger run blocking on the right side.
It maybe surprising but Phil Loadholt’s 10 yard split was 1.75 seconds (in 2009) which is faster than many smaller OL. His 40 yard time was 5.49 sec which is on the slow side.
By contrast TW’s 40 yard was 4.81 while his 10 yd split was 1.70. Few OL can compare well with TW’s speed which makes his potential great in the outside stretch plays and part of the reason Shanny selected him over Okung – http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/TSX/2010_OT
Jefferson1935 - February 3, 2012
he played it for half the season, as he moved back to RT and even C that year
he was also the LT that gave up the hits that ended Bradford’s season so i wouldn’t call it a ringing endorsement.
Steve Shoup - February 4, 2012
So who would you have put at LT?
Brown?
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Too early
Trent played well last season, better than the 2nd half of rookie season
Highspeed30 - February 3, 2012
He was improving
I’ll agree with that. But at least to my expectations, he was behind schedule. And the suspension for me has really raised a lot of red flags in terms of his character. Is he really serious about being a football player, and do you want this guy playing the most important postion on the O line
Redskin44 - February 3, 2012
TW does fine against DWare.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
hahaha everytime someone brings up TW your response is "he did well agaist Demarcus Ware one time"
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
That's all that really matters to me.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
Good thing no other team in the league has pass rushers!
mbedner - February 3, 2012
I know right!
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
yeah giving up 9 pressures in the first game earns him a gold star
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Steve, we know, you're weird about the linemen.
If they don’t do everything short of pull out a knife and stab the defensive end to death on the field, dig a hole on the 30 yard line and bury him, they suck.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
my point is people only care about sacks
yes sacks are worse than pressures, but 9 pressures means that he failed 9 of his 40 pass blocks, and meant those plays were a waste.
If you want to point to games that TW was really good at, they are out there, but allowing Ware to live in the backfield isn’t one of them.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Or you could look at it as he WON 31 of his 40!
See what I did there?
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
failed at logic?
LT’s have to be like hockey goalies, they need an extremely high success rate to be considered good or great.
If a LT is failing 25-30% of the time, that is only one of 5 o-line positions, exactly how successful do you think an offense will be with those odds?
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
According to whom?
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
people with brains
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
I venture to say most people have brains.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
Yep, so what was incorrect about my statement?
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
Nothing.
You could have also said people with skin, or people with hearts.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
Exactly my point
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
I'm glad that's settled Snarks Smith
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
Well the standard of top linemen is pretty well set.
Top tackles usually give up 0-3 sacks, 0-4 hits and 10-15 pressures over the course of a full season (which is on average 650 pass blocking snaps.
This past year TW was 2, 4, and 13 in those categories, but played in under 400 snaps. Based on a full season Trent’s numbers would have been more like 4, 8, 22, which is like middle of the pack for LT’s (especially when you factor in penalties and run blocking)
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
But he didn't play in those games, so we don't know.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
exactly that is why i based it off his averages
in reality it could have been a lot worse considering that in his spot for those last 4 games Willie Smith gave up 3 sacks, 10 hits and 7 pressures.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
They get paid on defense too
sometimes you have to give great defensive players credit for being great, Dware apply pressure to every QB and Every LT have trouble with him he is the best in the NFL
Highspeed30 - February 3, 2012
huh?
yes Ware is amazing, but a great game against him is limiting him to no sacks and 1-3 pressures, not 9. Also remember Ware went up against Brown for about 8-10 snaps that game, so TW faced even weaker competition for part of that time.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
it is too early to say
Like i said this will be his third year, i thought he struggled badly at the end of his rookie year, but i seen some improvement last year, and i expect him to improve more this year. I am not ready to move the guy to RT when he only started 23 games
Highspeed30 - February 3, 2012
I agree
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
okay but the injuries and suspension shouldn't be used as a positive here
I think he needs to earn that LT role, meaning the Redskins need another viable option.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Give him the time to learn it though
don’t force him to the right side, when we have no idea if the new LT will be any better. It’s much easier to find a RT, than a LT. If TW is imporving, which we all saw, no reason to move him.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
if he can hold on to the job fantastic
my point is I want the barometer for being our LT being a bit higher than “this guy is better than Jamaal Brown”
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
In all fainness to TW
Ware is not a great comparison. The guy is top 2 in the game. He makes most OT’s look bad
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
i agree with that
i’m just saying lets not hype TW for ‘stopping’ Ware when Ware still got the best of him a number of times.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
I would like the Bradford trade, but we can win either way
if Fisher keeps Sam, he would definitely want to trade the #2 pick (since he wouldn’t want RG3). I’d offer our 2012 first and second, plus the 2013 first (no more, take it or leave it). Big threat is Cleveland outbidding us. If we miss (or if we had already gotten Manning or Flynn), trade down for more picks, and Tannehill, Foles or Weeden. Exception to the latter: if Blackmon or somebody else we desperately wanted was still available at 6.
Donnio1234 - February 3, 2012
Why are you so worried about Cleveland?
I’m more worried about the Dolphins
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Well, they are ahead of us, have more ammunition (i.e., picks)
and quite possibly need a quarterback (although they could stick with McCoy, or get some vet like Manning or Flynn).
Donnio1234 - February 3, 2012
Actually, I think I would offer St Louis less than I said for Bradford
Maybe one first and one second. Because dumping Sam actually saves them money, and from their point of view, they get a better QB, cheaper, with two extra picks, giving up only a backup. We could also offer some player, although I don’t think Landry is worth much now. And Cleveland and other teams needing a QB might not be willing to give up as much – like Cleveland would have to give up a #4 pick to have Bradford replace McCoy.
Bradford was a #1 pick in 2010, so in this scenario he would be costing a #6 and #38. That sounds fair because he has had some problems in his first two years, so the bloom is off the rose.
Donnio1234 - February 4, 2012
i wouldnt worry about the dophins
our picks are higher
as for the trade , i would say yes
skinsdad62 - February 3, 2012
The reason the dolphins concern me
is that with that new ownership, and coaches, they really want to make a splash.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
New ownership = dumb signings
Peyton Manning for them, maybe Flynn.
iH8dallas - February 3, 2012
Watch out for Holmgren for Flynn
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
why?
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Fits his style
I did a post on this a while back. If you want why, go read that. It has some interesting info on his past QB history.
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
i'm not really sure that it does fit his style
or that we can really dictate a ‘style’ for a guy that was gifted Brett Favre. That is like saying 6th rounders are Bill Belicheck’s style.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
Who is the new owner again?
Perhaps I forgot about this one. I can only remember the guy from Jacksonville with the goofy mustache.
That’s him, if I’m not mistaken…
mbedner - February 3, 2012
They have multiple owners
I think Marc Anthony is a minority owner
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
I knew he was, but he has no personnel control
All Marc Anthony can do is say that he is a minority owner.
mbedner - February 3, 2012
They have a lot of figurehead owners
who want some flash
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
Geraldo is a dynamic guy
Donnio1234 - February 4, 2012
the dolphins concern me more than the Browns too.
I just think they would make a big push and might offer up a lot to get RG3
Highspeed30 - February 3, 2012
One of them is going to sign Flynn, so you probably don't have to worry too much
Parks Smith - February 3, 2012
not if the Redskins sign Flynn first!
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
God I hope your kidding
please tell me you don’t still want this
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
well i was somewhat kidding
but i have no problem with signing Flynn. And i’d easily take him over trading a pair of first rounders for Bradford.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
ok
you scared me a bit there. I though we got you off the Flynn kick a while ago LOL
Tiller56 - February 3, 2012
i'm fine with Flynn and i support him
I’m open to all options, but for me all factors are involved b/c i believe this team needs a lot more than a QB, and I don’t see the risk in trading up.
For me my top 3 QB options (in no particular order) are Tannehill, Flynn and Weeden. Obviously I would get a vet caddy for Tannehill, and i’d get a young guy (Cousins/Coleman for Flynn). Weeden’s a bit tougher b/c I don’t see them using two top 4 round picks (unless they trade back and stockpile them) on QB’s. So with Weeden I’d look to have a guy like Stanton and draft a guy like Coleman or Harnish late.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
From Jan 3 Redskins Mock Draft 1.0 by Parks Smith
Obey - February 3, 2012
Why would you trade 2010's BEST QB...
…for 2012’s 2nd best QB? Make no sense.
Unless the Rams want to save a few bucks since RGIII will be cheaper that Bradford.
44ever - February 3, 2012
That and you can acquire a ton of draft picks and talent very quickly...
mbedner - February 3, 2012
Why not just trade the pick then?
and keep the better of the two QBs.
44ever - February 3, 2012
Who is to say that he is the better of the two Quarterbacks.
If Fisher, after film study, determines RG3 is the better QB why not make the switch?
mbedner - February 3, 2012
There were a zillion posts about Trent Williams and no one addressed:
The most important thing! Drugs! If he gets nailed again he’s gone for the year. I say trade him if you can find a fool to give high value for him. He certainly had PLENTY of warnings and ignored them.
Davis I’m don’t know about, but on general principles I’d say trade him also, hopefully to another fool.
Dipper - February 3, 2012
If the Rams draft RG3
they will have destroyed all leverage for trading Bradford. If they put him on the trading block before the draft, they’ve made their intentions clear and still have destroyed their own leverage.
Really, trying to trade Bradford or draft RG3 is a no-win situation for them.
TheDeepBall - February 3, 2012
i get what you are saying about making their intentions clear
but i really think that even if they put him on the block someone would come a calling with a major offer.
Look at Jay Cutler, McDaniels totally screwed that up by trying to get Cassel and Cutler wanted out of Denver, and they still got Chicago to back the truck up for them.
Steve Shoup - February 3, 2012
I can't see why they would lose all leverage
Donnio1234 - February 3, 2012
we could get Favre
give him a few of the cheerleaders cell numbers and I’m sure we could lock him into a 2 year deal
Redskin44 - February 3, 2012
I'm going out on a limb
minimum- give up the #6
Maximum- match Ditka’s 1999 trade offer
TheSportsManager - February 3, 2012
Sam>Rex. (why I voted yes)
Other than that, the dude may have a little lower cieling than RGIII, but clearly has a higher floor (as he is a veteran). Other than that, we need to consider all options (Peyton, RGIII, Luck, Bradford, Sam, Drew to improve over Rex).
I would kind of put Flynn, Jason, Smith, and other draft pick possibilities below the group above. Probably slightly better than Rex, but with some danger that they are not much better and that the disruption is not worth it.
But having Sam as one more top line option is fine.
TCO - February 4, 2012
this just in shanny inviting gus freotte to ota,s
lohaus#54 - February 4, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Hogs Haven to post a comment.