“Everybody says he’s inaccurate. He’s not – he throws a great ball! It’s a low-percentage offense. There’s never anybody open underneath, and he’s got no protection. You can see it if you look closely enough. People are stupid.Perhaps things like punctuating his comments with things like "people are stupid" is why he doesn't work for a team now, but that's beside the point. On the Redskins official blog, Matt Terl pulls up Favre's and Locker's college stats and he does find a remarkable resemblance between them. You should read the whole article to see where Razzano is coming from and what players he has been right (and wrong) about. But Redskins fans should find the comments on Locker the most interesting. Here is how the article finishes up:
Watching Locker roll to his right and release the ball just before an oncoming pass rusher arrived, Razzano exclaimed, “Look, he puts his shoulder into it. Look! It’s just like Favre. If people can’t see that …” I could almost feel the Excitement Meter shaking with seismic abandon. Razzano paused the tape and continued: “My first exposure to Locker, watching a game on TV, I did not like what I saw. He threw errant passes and wasn’t very accurate. But then I saw the tape and realized it’s not him. He had more drops [by receivers] than anyone in the Pac-10, and he was running for his life – his line was probably the worst in the conference. And he still made plays with the game on the line. The guy’s a winner.” Razzano hit play on the remote and paced around the room as Locker faked a handoff, rolled to his left and threw a touchdown pass to a receiver in the middle of the end zone. “Look at him here,” Razzano said, “throwing against the grain …”
There has been plenty of talk about the possibility of the Washington Redskins trading back their first-round draft pick, the tenth overall, in order to add additional selections later in the draft.They may not be able to execute such a trade for a number of reasons. They have to find another team to deal with and that means that a player that the other team desperately wants has to be on the board. With nine teams picking in front of them a lot could happen to torpedo any deals that the Redskins may have worked out with potential trading partners. In addition, the Redskins might have a player who they have rated as a top-five talent fall to them at 10. With so many needs, it seems that virtually any of the top players could fit in and they might have to abandon any thoughts of moving down to take advantage of the value on the board. Being unable to move down in the first round, however, does not squash any chances that they may have of picking up additional picks in this draft or in a future draft. Their second-round pick, the 41st overall, could be quite attractive to another team that couldn't quite get what it wanted in the first round. Using the draft trade value chart (not always adhered to completely, but useful as a guideline) and some past history, we can take an educated guess at what the Redskins might be able to get in exchange for their second rounder. A first-round pick in 2012--This happens with some degree of frequency. Any pick in the following drafted traded one-for-one for a pick in the current draft is generally one round better. It seems unlikely that the Redskins would pull the trigger on such a deal unless they were pretty confident that the result would be a top-five pick. A later second and a third--If they drop back into the range of picks 20-30 (picks 52-62 overall) they could pick up a pick somewhere in the middle of the third round. The Chargers have multiple picks in the second and third round and while they don't have the exact picks that would make such a deal work they could make up the difference by swapping around some other later selections. With as many needs as the Redskins have they certainly could find a player who would represent good value a dozen or so slots back. A later second and a second next year--The same deal described above could be done with a second-rounder for next year as compensation instead of the 2010 third. This scenario might be a little more attractive than taking a first next year as it will not have the Redskins sitting out rounds two through four this year. A later second and a fourth--If there are six players or so who the Redskins would like when pick 41 rolls around, they could go back five or six spots and pick up a fourth-round pick. A later second and a fifth--Moving down three spots would still net the Redskins enough value to get another pick in the fifth round. Again, if there are a few players with whom they'd be happy there, why not trade back. It may be difficult to find a trade partner here but if the chips fall right and, say, the Lions at 44 want a player who they think theTexans or Vikings might take, they might spend the fifth to ensure that they can get their guy. Should the Redskins move back? Stand pat? Would would your draft strategy be?
But chances are, we're going to stay right at 14, and we'll be fine. We have a really good feeling that there will be a couple of guys there that we'll be thrilled to have. It's probably not worth our while to give up picks to make a move to go get a particular guy.In case you haven't noticed, this is lying season in the NFL. You can usually take what any GM or any other team official and expect the exact opposite. Here is the truth-serum version of what Devaney said:
Sure, we're willing to deal, up or down. But don't expect me to pay a premium to move up and don't even think about calling with a lowball offer if you want to me to move back.Are you listening, Mike Shanahan? (h/t to @EvanSilva)
[caption id="attachment_5657" align="aligncenter" width="250" caption="Dalton's TCU team was undefeated in 2010"][/caption] It is unlikely that Mike Shanahan has much time these days to see what is being said about the Washington Redskins on the internet. But if he did, he'd be smiling. On Friday, we talked about John McClain of the Houston Chronicle reporting that he has heard a great deal of buzz about the possibility of the Redskins trading up in the first round to get a quarterback, presumably Blaine Gabbert, early in the round. Then yesterday came the following from another highly-connected NFL scribe, Pete Prisco of CBS Sports:
According to a league source, the Redskins are looking to trade down in the first round with the idea they will draft either Florida State quarterback Christian Ponder or TCU quarterback Andy Dalton. The Redskins, who pick 10th overall, would like to get a second-round pick from a team in exchange for moving back to their spot in the first round. They could then use their two second-round picks to bolster the defense.So one well-wired writer says that they're moving up. Another says that they're hell bent on trading down. There is supposed to be interest in Gabbert. The Redskins' interest in Ponder has been known for a while but Dalton, who has visited Redskins Park, is a relatively new name to the mix. Add in Shanahan's longtime infatuation with Jake Locker and you have a bevy of potential quarterback targets for the Redskins. In other words, nobody has any idea what is going on. Matt Terl at the Redskins official blog counted 29 different players being tabbed as the Redskins' first-round selection. This is partially due to the fact that the Redskins have so many needs that you could justify a pick at almost any position. But it also means that the Redskins' smoke-producing machine is cranked up in high gear and is having its intended effect. Does all of the smoke have you confused? What do you think the Redskins will do?
There is a lot of, well, stuff floating around these days as we are less than two weeks away from the NFL draft. You hear that just about every team wants this player or that one and wants to trade up or down. I literally could spend all day on the keyboard pounding out the latest rumors being floated around. Certain reports, however, make me stop what I'm doing and take notice.
John McClain of the Houston Chronicle is one of the best and most respected NFL reporters out there. He doesn't just make stuff up or pass along something that he overheard one guy say or anything like that. He's old school and he's going to be pretty sure about something before he reports it. So, when I saw this tidbit I, as noted above, stopped what I was doing and took notice:
I don't know what they have to offer, but I hear the Redskins are trying like crazy to trade up to get one of the quarterbacks, Blaine Gabbert, I imagine.
This, of course, has all of the elements of the smoke that was discussed here earlier this week. And I'm passing it along only because of who wrote it. But let's assume for a moment that it's true and the Redskins are hell bent on putting Blaine Gabbert in burgundy and gold. What would it take for the Redskins to trade up from tenth overall to a position where they would have a reasonable shot at Gabbert?
The fourth pick could be a good spot from which to pluck Gabbert. If, as predicted, the Panthers take Cam Newton first overall and the Broncos and Bills address other needs, Gabbert could be there when the Bengals draft with the fourth pick. Of course, there is no guarantee that John Elway is happy with Tim Tebow or that the Bills will stick with Ryan Fitzpatrick or that the Bengals won't prepare for life without Carson Palmer.
But, for the purposes of the exercise here, let's assume that Gabbert is available in the fourth slot and that the Redskins want to go get him. According to the draft value chart, the fourth pick is worth 1,800 points and the tenth is worth 1,300. The 500-point difference is the value of the 40th pick in the draft. The Redskins hold the 41st pick, so one would think that perhaps one of their seventh-rounders to make up the difference might get the deal done. This doesn't mean that it would be a good idea. In fact, I'm sure that it is just unanimous that it would be a terrible idea. But, in answer to McClain's query about what they have to offer, there's the answer.
What do you think? Should the Redskins trade up to get their QB of the future? More importantly, will they?