Skip to content

Special Monday 10-pack: The Rams-Redskins trade

Robert Griffin III AP

Every Monday during the regular season, I stay up late and/or get up early and bang out a 2,000-or-so-word item that offers up 10 takes on the Sunday that was.

It’s been more than two months since I’ve had one of those late nights/early mornings, and with the free agency frenzy ramping up and the Rams-Redskins deal going down late Friday night, it makes sense to take a long look at the surprising deal before it quickly fades into the rear-view mirror.

And so here are 10 different things that (eventually) came to mind while pondering the trade that sent the No. 2 overall pick to the Redskins in exchange for the sixth overall pick in 2012, a second-round pick in 2012, a first-round pick in 2013, and a first-round pick in 2014.

1.  Tomato, tomahto as to the terms.

More than a few Redskins fans have insisted, some vehemently, that the team gave up two first-round picks, not three.

It’s largely a matter of semantics, until considering what the Redskins actually have done.  In order to get Robert Griffin III (or, possibly, Andrew Luck . . . more on that later), the Redskins gave up three first-round picks and one second-round pick.  And one of the first-round picks was the sixth overall selection.

How many Pro Bowl players who have proven consistently that they can perform at a high level in the NFL could be secured for that kind of haul?  They say every player in the league could be traded for the right price.  The Redskins could have targeted nearly any player in the league by offering the sixth overall pick in 2012, a second-round pick this year, and two more first-round picks.

2.  Redskins mortgage their future, and Griffin’s.

When Robert Griffin III visited PFT Live last week, I addressed with him the possibility that the team that moves up to get him will give up too much.

“It does cross your mind,” Griffin said, before adroitly tiptoeing around the reality that a team could make it harder for Griffin to be as successful as he can be by sacrificing too much to add him to the roster.

It definitely should cross the mind of every Redskins fan, especially if those future first-round picks are in the top 10, too.

Of course, if they are, it won’t be coach Mike Shanahan’s problem any longer.

3.  Free agency can fill some of the gaps, but not cheaply.

In 1989, when the Vikings sent a package of players and picks headlined by three first-rounders to the Cowboys for running back Herschel Walker, the Vikings couldn’t resort to free agency to fill the gaps.

Now, the Redskins can rely on the acquisition of veteran talent, especially with more than $30 million in 2012 cap room.

The problem is that excess reliance on free agency undermines the all-important nucleus of young players that any consistently successful team needs.  Likewise, with the rookie wage scale, first-round picks create far less of a financial burden.  And so by swapping three relatively low-cost first-round picks and a second-round pick for Robert Griffin III, the Redskins will now have to resort to spending more money for more seasoned (i.e., older) talent.

4.  Could a Luck power play be more likely?

Before Friday, any effort by Andrew Luck to pull a John Elway/Eli Manning would have been complicated.  If Luck had said he didn’t want to try to fill Peyton Manning’s shoes on a team that has jettisoned many of its quality players in recent days, the Colts would have had find a way to work something out with another team.

Now, the Colts need only to work out a one-spot flip-flop with the Redskins.

One one hand, the price could be too high for Washington to finish the climb to No. 1, given what the Redskins gave up to move from No. 6 to No. 2.  On the other hand, if Luck tells the Colts he doesn’t want to play in Indy and Griffin has made it clear he’ll go anywhere, would the Colts bring to town a guy who doesn’t want to be there — or a guy who does?

5.  Rams could see Griffin, a lot.

The team that opted not to pick Griffin and to trade his rights within the conference will now have to play him at least once every three years, and quite possibly more often.

Moreover, the Rams will potentially be competing with the Redskins for playoff positioning and, more directly, in the playoffs.

And when these two teams square off, there will be extra pressure on the Rams to justify passing on Griffin.

The only thing we know with certainty at this point is that Rams defensive coordinator (for now) Gregg Williams most likely won’t be putting out a bounty on Griffin.

6.  The NFL needs a draft lottery.

Though the “Suck of Luck” drama never gave rise to any specific complaints that teams were tanking for the top spot in the draft, this trade demonstrates that bad teams in meaningless late-season games have no incentive to try to win.  In fact, they have a very real incentive to lose.

That doesn’t mean the players or coaches will take a dive.  But it means that some owners will be even more tempted, once considering the dramatic difference between the value of the second pick and the sixth, to instruct the coach to give the backups a chance to get some game reps in order to give the front office some film that can be used to help make roster and depth chart decisions in the future.

The only way to minimize that temptation is to determine the first 10 picks based on a weighted lottery.  It would be a great offseason event, with plenty of anticipation and a significant TV audience.

7.  Shanahan has bounty insurance.

To the extent that the NFL determines former Redskins defensive coordinator Gregg Williams used bounties and if the precedent for punishment becomes a first-round draft pick, Redskins coach Mike Shanahan should be concerned.

Unless they have no first-round draft picks.  For the next three years.

And so, no matter how bad it gets, Shanahan already has protected his next three first-round picks by parlaying them into the second pick in 2012.

8.  Timing of deal favors the Redskins.

In the days after the Scouting Combine, the buzz generated by Robert Griffin III seemed to suggest that it would make sense for the Rams to hold an auction now.  But then, as the Peyton Manning sweepstakes and free agency approached, the idea of letting the teams that don’t get Manning or Matt Flynn or anyone else who may be available become more desperate — and thus more willing to cough up a dramatic offer — made more sense.

The Dolphins likely were the wild card in this equation.  If (when) owner Stephen Ross fails for the third time in 15 months to land a big fish (Jim Harbaugh, Jeff Fisher, Peyton Manning), Ross quite likely would have called Fisher and said, “Name your price.”

The Redskins wisely opted to eliminate the risk of Ross blowing the lid off the market by forcing the issue now.  The fact that G.M. Bruce Allen and company ironed out the deal the night before Oklahoma State receiver Justin Blackmon drew rave reviews at his Pro Day workout prevented the Rams from getting cold feet about moving all the way down to No. 6.

Put simply, the Redskins knew that they weren’t getting Peyton Manning, and they knew it would get harder to get Robert Griffin III by waiting until after other teams didn’t get Peyton Manning.  So the Redskins offered a significant package now — fully aware that it may have taken even more later to get the deal done.

9.  Rams need to use the picks wisely.

It’s not enough to parlay the second pick in the draft into a trio of first-round picks.  The Rams now have to use the first-round picks, and use them well.

Coupled with their own picks, the Rams will select five times in the first round over the next three years.  If they don’t emerge with key contributors who become the nucleus of the team, the trade will be regarded as a failure.

Especially if Griffin ends up being every bit as good as advertised.

10.  Rams get more stadium leverage.

Well before the Rams use that fifth first-round pick over the next three years, the Rams will know whether they’ll be playing their homes games as of 2015 in Los Angeles or elsewhere.

And having those picks will serve only to give the Rams a little more leverage as they try to work out a deal to renovate the Edward Jones Dome — or to build a new stadium in Los Angeles.

Though the picks don’t have to pan out before the issue of franchise location is resolved, the promise of having a group of young, talented, marketable star players could make the Rams the most attractive possibility for placement in Los Angeles.  Which could make St. Louis try even harder to keep them around.

Permalink 77 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Features, Rumor Mill, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
77 Responses to “Special Monday 10-pack: The Rams-Redskins trade”
  1. slickzmoney says: Mar 12, 2012 3:19 AM

    Damn man why are you still up? On point #5 – its not too crazy to envision a Rams/Redskins NFC Champ. in a few years.

  2. shzastl says: Mar 12, 2012 3:21 AM

    “7. Shanahan has bounty insurance.

    Unless they have no first-round draft picks. For the next three years.”

    But they DO have a first-round pick–THIS year. What if the NFL takes that away? Would it undo the trade?

  3. cali49er707 says: Mar 12, 2012 3:24 AM

    i give griffin a lot of credit for how he got the most out of baylor & how he rose through the draft process but, its been RG3 overkill of late i do think he’s got the skills & wish him the best no doubt.

  4. jaggedmark says: Mar 12, 2012 3:25 AM

    Really good stuff posted here, Mike. Nice job

  5. richardcolvinreid says: Mar 12, 2012 3:25 AM

    @ 6 heck no. The nba has it and it’s highly suspect at best. Don’t mess with the nfl draft.

  6. footballfanman says: Mar 12, 2012 3:32 AM

    Quite the comprehensive piece. The Skins gave up a lot. Will it be worth it? Only time will tell.

  7. cuffhimbanano says: Mar 12, 2012 3:35 AM

    Nice try, but the “almost any player in the league” rationale is grossly misleading. The DC team is betting Griffin III is an all-pro type franchise QB. Almost any player in the league doesn’t account include these players.
    The Panthers wouldn’t trade Newton for that deal, neither would the Giants with Eli, the Pats with Brady, or the Steelers with Roethlisberger.
    When you’re talking about the most important position in all of team sports ‘almost any player’ is a misleading weak argument.
    Teams miss on 1st rounders all the time and are fine. The key with missing on a QB is the reps and years invested. If Griffin III fulfills expectations the DC team will look back on this trade as a bargain.

    Regards,

    dc team hater

  8. soforizo says: Mar 12, 2012 3:39 AM

    Good points. I may not give a damn about the Redskins, but to call them fools right now it’s premature. Why I think it’s advantageous to the Rams, it is too early to call it a win.

  9. kowboydmac says: Mar 12, 2012 3:42 AM

    This trade can also dictate these two teams setting up to win their division.

    Redskins have lacked that “it” at quarterback, even though they’ve had talent at receiver, offensive line (been a couple years, but it use to be there), tight end and a decent running game.

    The abundance of picks the Rams could get them an offensive line.

  10. grandpoopah says: Mar 12, 2012 3:45 AM

    Jeff Fisher has to be giddy about all those high draft picks to build around Bradford and Long.

  11. silverbuffalo says: Mar 12, 2012 3:56 AM

    I really feel like this is a HUGE gamble and has a 1 in 10 payout. After watching espn’s draft day trades I see it would work out for the skins like Marshall Faulk, Jerry Rice, Steve Young but I seriously doubt it

  12. wtfru2 says: Mar 12, 2012 4:01 AM

    Old Danny boy will never get it, that you can’t buy a Super Bowl team. Giving up all those draft picks?

    When was the last time you saw the Giants or Packers do that?

    Then again when was the last time the Redskins were in the Super Bowl? Not on Danny’s watch…

  13. truthserum4u says: Mar 12, 2012 4:01 AM

    Absolutely no need for a lottery system in the NFL. Year after year we see bad teams scheduled for a high draft slot, win a late season meaningless game (or two) and move down the draft board. Heck, the Vikings just did it this year and lost out on the Griffin auction.

    There’s been no evidence over the years that tanking in any form has ever taken place. So why fix something that isn’t broken?

  14. sickcuz says: Mar 12, 2012 4:06 AM

    This trade doesn’t compare with the Herschel Walker trade. Minnesota traded for a veteran rb and gave away picks to do so. Washington swapped a pick and gave away 2 1st rounders and a 2nd. That means the skins miss out on 3 picks. They’ve had drafts where the pick around that many for entire draft. They stand to have a good measure of picks these next three years. A lottery is a horrible idea. Look at the NBA. The same teams remain lottery teams and typically the team winning the lottery isn’t the one that needed it most. Anti Redskin bias is one thing…you’re supposed to act like a journalist and try to hide it.

  15. shadowflames43 says: Mar 12, 2012 5:52 AM

    Unfortunately, a lottery draft wouldn’t work. It’d likely be more interesting than the current system, but separating the bottom ten has the potential to step on the toes of the teams sitting at 11 to roughly 14, and maybe higher. You can almost justify 15-20 suffering because the league’s playoffs have a 6 team turnover rate. Consider, the difference between 10 and 11 was 1 win this year. So you’re just incentivising losing to middle class teams. Now if they were to do all the non-playoff teams, at least that would be fair. While maybe some teams shouldn’t be so quick to rush into the playoffs, very few teams will lose to miss them. Then again, the 20th pick gaining the first overall pick isn’t fair either. It may help if you increase the number of playoff teams, or structured the lottery draft so that a team can only move forward or back 7 picks. But otherwise, it fails to do what you want to accomplish, and then just adds further imbalance.

  16. KIR says: Mar 12, 2012 6:08 AM

    A 10 team lottery for the first pic is too many teams. A lottery 4 the top 3 teams for the first pic sounds more reasonable. Maybe a separate lottery for the remaining 9 teams for the second thru fifth pic might work.

  17. burgundyandgold says: Mar 12, 2012 6:14 AM

    First it is not a matter of semantics – they gave up two firsts and one second. Two, is your point that they could of have had any player in the league for this price that they should have traded of Tom Brady or Aaron Rogers? What choice did the Resskins have? They desperately need a franchise QB. This is a way better use of resources than Peyton would have been and certainly better than paying a bunch of money for Matt Flynn. What other choice was there? Take Tannenbaum with the 6 th pick? Who knows if he can play. This is a proud franchise with a storied history and three rings. They had to make a big move. They use the uncapped year to clear all the bad contracts and have made one smart decision after another with the last two drafts and free agency periods. The one area they missed on twice was QB. They had to make this move. They still have 7 picks in this years draft and Shanny and Allen are good with lower round picks. Those out there saying typical Resskins don’t realize there are more pieces to the puzzle in place. I actually think the reaction of Cowboy, Giants and Eagels fans has been more appropriate. They know the Redskins are much improved and this move has them worried. I know many moves have spectacularly failed over the years but this is different. Snyder is not calling the shots on personnell. I think he has taken a page from George Steinbrenner when he stopped meddling and let baseball people make decisions and the Yankees became a dynasty. Watch out league.

  18. thetruth113 says: Mar 12, 2012 6:24 AM

    It’s not a matter of semantics saying whether the Redskins gave up 3 or 2 first rounders for Griffin. If they had traded ONLY the #6 pick for the #2 pick, would you describe the trade as the Redskins having given up a 1st rounder for #2 or would you say the Redskins moved up to #2 for nothing?

    The Redskins gave up 2 1st rounders to move up from #6 to #2. It is extremely misleading to describe it any other way.

  19. thetruth113 says: Mar 12, 2012 6:30 AM

    It also laughable that you talk about how much risk the Redskins are taking on with the trade giving up a haul worth any player in football then talking in point #9 about how much risk the Rams have in making sure they get the picks right. You can’t have it both ways. If it’s the deal of the century for the Rams, then by definition the risk is minimal

  20. Matt-NC says: Mar 12, 2012 6:31 AM

    If the Rams don’t make it to the Super Bowl by 2016, fire everyone on that staff.

  21. kmdp4 says: Mar 12, 2012 6:31 AM

    The Redskins gave up the 6th pick this year, you are correct and the Rams gave up the second. So the Redskins still only gave up 2 picks, i would think a guy educated as a lawyer would be able to figure that out.

  22. WestCoastVet says: Mar 12, 2012 6:40 AM

    I like #6

  23. Anders Cules says: Mar 12, 2012 6:51 AM

    I’m sure Chicago would love a lottery.

  24. pwningpft says: Mar 12, 2012 6:51 AM

    When it comes to #2 – I think way too much is being made of “how are they going to surround RG3 with talent now without these sacred 1st round picks”.

    Redskins had more of these “irreplaceable” 1st round picks starting on their team last year then teams like the Patriots and the Steelers. Where did it get them? Heck nearly half of the playoff Saints roster is made up of near UDFA’s.

    FACT – The league leaders in 2011 in:

    Rushing Yards
    Passing Yards
    Tackles
    Interceptions
    Sacks
    Receptions
    Touchdowns

    All were NOT 1st round draft picks! In fact 3 of these league leaders were undrafted. Take your foot off the ledge people – there is plenty of NFL caliber talent out there to surround RG3 with, even without these sacred 1st round picks they gave up.

  25. vaskinsfan says: Mar 12, 2012 7:14 AM

    People who say the Redskins mortgaged their future and have no picks for the next 3 years are just plain ignorant. The Skins will have 1 less pick this year, and for each of the the next 2 years. That’s only 1 player a year. They’ll still have 3rd-7th rd picks this year after takin Griffin. They’ll still have their 2nd-7th rd picks in 13 & 14. There are more good players drafted in rounds 2-7 then the 1st round every year.

  26. metalhead65 says: Mar 12, 2012 7:15 AM

    the skins gave up allot to get griffen but given the hype he has gotten from this site and others you can’t say it was to much. now it is up to him to prove it was worth it since the skins will not be able to surround him with the young talent to help him succeed. no excuses for him though,he better win and he better win now or be labeled a bust. he wanted and embraced all the hype now live up to it.

  27. kmdp4 says: Mar 12, 2012 7:15 AM

    wtfru2 says:
    Mar 12, 2012 4:01 AM
    Old Danny boy will never get it, that you can’t buy a Super Bowl team. Giving up all those draft picks?

    When was the last time you saw the Giants or Packers do that?

    Then again when was the last time the Redskins were in the Super Bowl? Not on Danny’s watch…

    ————————————————-

    How do you think the Giants got Eli Manning, your entire comment is idiotic.

  28. geniusesq says: Mar 12, 2012 7:27 AM

    The Redskins have had 1st round picks most years, but still haven’t won anything. It was time to get a franchise QB, so they did.

    Stop hating.

  29. sadskinsfan89 says: Mar 12, 2012 7:33 AM

    the skins still have a first round pick this year right? they are picking second overall so please tell me how they gave up 3 first rounders? its only two

  30. bartpkelly says: Mar 12, 2012 7:36 AM

    Geeze they did give 3 first rounders and a 2nd for the 2nd pick. That is what it is. They didn’t LOSE 3 first rounders but they did GIVE them. If they just swapped picks I would say the Redskins GAVE a first rounder for a first rounder.

  31. tv426 says: Mar 12, 2012 7:45 AM

    The notion that any team would tank games in order to try and land a guy in college is absurd. If the draft has proven anything it is that it is a crap shoot. This is especially true of QBs. Look at the best QBs in the league now:
    Brady – 6th Rd
    Brees – 2nd Rd
    Rodgers – late 1st Rd.

  32. thehouseofho says: Mar 12, 2012 7:48 AM

    thetruth113 says:
    Mar 12, 2012 6:24 AM
    It’s not a matter of semantics saying whether the Redskins gave up 3 or 2 first rounders for Griffin. If they had traded ONLY the #6 pick for the #2 pick, would you describe the trade as the Redskins having given up a 1st rounder for #2 or would you say the Redskins moved up to #2 for nothing?

    The Redskins gave up 2 1st rounders to move up from #6 to #2. It is extremely misleading to describe it any other way.

    ——–

    Stating it in the manner of the Redskins giving up 2 1st rounders to get the #2 pick is also misleading as it does not make it clear they no longer have the #6 pick as well.

    The best way to describe it would be to visualize what each team put on a hypothetical table. The Rams put the #2 pick on the table. The Redskins put the #6 pick, this year’s second round pick, the 2013 first round pick and the 2014 first round pick. The Rams gave up (1) 1st round pick and received (3) first round picks and (1) 2nd round pick in return. That’s how it works.

    FYI – for those who insist on saying the Redskins traded (2) future 1st rounders and swapped picks this year; the entire thing is a swap. The definition of swap is an exchange, otherwise known as a trade.

  33. baddegg says: Mar 12, 2012 7:53 AM

    wtfru2 says: Mar 12, 2012 4:01 AM

    When was the last time you saw the Giants or Packers do that?

    —————

    Um…when the Giants traded with the Charges and go their franchise QB, who just won a second SB?

  34. pwningpft says: Mar 12, 2012 7:57 AM

    houseofho:

    I think an easy way to put it is that the skins gave up a NET loss of 2 1sts and a 2nd for RG3.

  35. baddegg says: Mar 12, 2012 8:00 AM

    pwningpft says: Mar 12, 2012 6:51 AM

    When it comes to #2 – I think way too much is being made of “how are they going to surround RG3 with talent now without these sacred 1st round picks”.

    Redskins had more of these “irreplaceable” 1st round picks starting on their team last year then teams like the Patriots and the Steelers. Where did it get them? Heck nearly half of the playoff Saints roster is made up of near UDFA’s.

    FACT – The league leaders in 2011 in:

    Rushing Yards
    Passing Yards
    Tackles
    Interceptions
    Sacks
    Receptions
    Touchdowns

    All were NOT 1st round draft picks! In fact 3 of these league leaders were undrafted. Take your foot off the ledge people – there is plenty of NFL caliber talent out there to surround RG3 with, even without these sacred 1st round picks they gave up.
    ———-
    What a great comment. There is this kind of implication that without a first round pick a team is just going to flat out suck. But you are totally right, the league is full of terrific players from other rounds.

    What the Redskins did was make a calculated move to fill the one slot HARDEST to fill otherwise — franchise QB. When you look at the position they were gunning for, it was a good, calculated risk.

  36. zjfr2 says: Mar 12, 2012 8:01 AM

    semantics?

    Trade this year’s 2 and a 1 in 2013 & 2014 to swap 1st rounders this year.

    Meaning they only “give up” the right to pick a player 3 times not 4.

    Where is the semantics?

  37. urfinished says: Mar 12, 2012 8:21 AM

    1. Wow you hate the Redskins.
    2. They wont have a first round pick in 2 straight drafts (not 3). They will be taking Griffin in this year’s draft…remember?
    3. How can you bash them and then say they will be competing with the Rams for a playoff spot for years? Choose a side.

  38. hodag54501 says: Mar 12, 2012 8:22 AM

    One more time:
    Before you dismiss this out of hand, think about it.
    I’ve seen Matt Flynn play and the guy is a “top 15″ starter in the league, as Aaron Rodgers said last week.
    Indy hires Matt Flynn in free agency, then deals the number one pick(and the rights to Luck) to any team out there willing to pay to get Luck. Someone will. Indy would have an NFL tested, schooled and very good QB, AND several high draft picks and/or players. Is one Andrew Luck worth more than several high picks? Especially when you have your starter ready to go?

  39. eessppnn says: Mar 12, 2012 8:24 AM

    No way a lottery! Football is not a sport you toss games to get a better draft pick

  40. ramsox says: Mar 12, 2012 8:38 AM

    Mike, excellent post. One overlooked item however, is the added pressure Bradford now faces. The fact that Bradford’s contract under the old collective bargaining agreement is untradeable forced them to not even consider trading Bradford and keeping the pick to use on Griffin. Although Luck and Griffin will be forever linked and compared, Bradford and Griffin will also.

  41. vtsquirm says: Mar 12, 2012 8:52 AM

    tv426 says:
    Mar 12, 2012 7:45 AM
    The notion that any team would tank games in order to try and land a guy in college is absurd. If the draft has proven anything it is that it is a crap shoot. This is especially true of QBs. Look at the best QBs in the league now:
    Brady – 6th Rd
    Brees – 2nd Rd
    Rodgers – late 1st Rd.

    _________________________
    ahem….you just showed that those three teams got lucky.

    Peyton Manning… 1st overall
    Eli Manning… 1st overall
    Michael Vick… 1st overall
    Jay Cutler… 1st round
    Matthew Stafford… 1st round
    Sam Bradford… 1st overall
    Philip Rivers… 1st round
    Matt Ryan… 1st round

    I think the lowest pick was Cutler (somewhere around pick #10?). I can see a pretty high incentive to tank games to get one of these QBs who were all highly thought of coming out of college. No? all except for Bradford have been to the playoffs.

  42. londonfletcher says: Mar 12, 2012 9:01 AM

    First off, “Giving up X pick” would be trading and moving from 6th to 10th. That’s “Giving up” a pick. Moving from 6th to 2nd isn’t “Giving up” a pick. Giving the Rams two first rounders in the next two drafts is “Giving up picks”.

    Secondly, if you think that Snyder is still making decisions in DC, please just stop posting. You’re annoying and have no idea what you’re talking about. Snyder hasn’t been involved in player acquisition since he fired Vinny TWO years ago.

    I also love how everybody is hating on RGIII now because the Redskins made the trade and now, nobody else can have him. The hater switch got turned on once you realized your team won’t get him. And you can say whatever you want about what the Redskins “gave up” to get him, but we haven’t had a QB start more than three seasons since Mark Rypien left in ’93. That’s 20 years, people. For what we’re paying for Griffin, I think we’ll live, and be much better at that.

  43. bcjim says: Mar 12, 2012 9:05 AM

    1. Tomato, tomahto as to the terms….

    This section is a near complete fail and the usual disclaimer as always applies…Just because YOU post something, doesn’t make it so.

  44. tcostant says: Mar 12, 2012 9:14 AM

    Watch the Rams trade that #6 overall pick and one of their second rounders and trade up to the Browns #4 oick and draft Justin Blackmon.

  45. paulsmith107 says: Mar 12, 2012 9:17 AM

    @wtftu
    I just want to point out that the last time the giants made a trade similar to that it was for Eli manning. Just saying

  46. nitzenbaum - not yer momma's 'skins fan says: Mar 12, 2012 9:21 AM

    Yes, true houseofho. It is also misleading to imply the ‘skins gave away 3 first round picks and got nothing in return. That’s what all these headline idiots, like Flowerio, and other idiots say…”they gave away 3 first picks, oh yikes, oh jeez, oh grab my nutz.”
    It’s all about ignoring the fact that #2 is WAY better than #6 and the cost of moving up those 4 slots in the trade hoping to get Grif or Luck. The value of moving up those four places.

    To the tool that said everyone is smart enough to figure that out I say you must not read here often.

  47. cosmoman11 says: Mar 12, 2012 9:28 AM

    Really went out on a limb with your analysis for #9. Hopefully the Rams front office will read that and realize that they have to make good picks. Never would have known otherwise.

  48. umrguy42 says: Mar 12, 2012 9:35 AM

    With respect to #7, it’s a nice thought, but I think Goodell would find a way to punish them anyway. (I’d just hope he wouldn’t take away the picks traded to the Rams, else I’d expect the whole deal to be voided).

  49. homelanddefense says: Mar 12, 2012 9:41 AM

    A draft lottery, are you out of your mind? SO many NBA teams have gotten absolutely screwed because of that ridiculous lottery….and it teams in the NBA still tank to get the worst records.

    It wont stop tanking, it will only increase the # of teams that get jobbed every year.

  50. skinfangray says: Mar 12, 2012 9:48 AM

    Wow! You will sink to any depth to bash the skins, huh? I kind of figured it would take you a few days to figure out a way to spin this trade as bad for the Skins, without bashing RG3, but this was epic even for you. The best part is your assertion that Shanahan orchestrated this to prevent the team from losing first round picks the next 3 years. You are aware that we still have our first round pick this year, right? And the league has no desire to take it from us, no matter how bad you would like it to happen, being a fan of the 2011 most disappointing team of the year, the Eagles. And, by the way, it was your Eagles that went crazy in free agency last year, not the Skins.

    Here is a thought, just change the name of your little blog to the Eagles Fan Club blog, and then you can complain about how all of the other teams cheat, lie and steal except your perfect little Eagles. Or, you could for once just try to be a little objective in your posts.

  51. yevrag3535 says: Mar 12, 2012 9:52 AM

    Redskins or it that the deadskins will never win with Shanahan. Who ever QB’s them, he is not John Elway and he is the reason they won in Denver, not the crazy finger pointing nut job of a coach.

  52. dcfan4life says: Mar 12, 2012 9:53 AM

    An NFL lottery is the only point you made that is just flat out wrong. How many times with the NBA does the worst team not get the pick. The NFL does nearly everything right, and by doing so has the one thing that no other league has, the true belief that any year can be the year for any team. In the NFL, absence from the playoffs last around 10 years. Only the Jaguars, Texans, Browns, Lions, and Vikings have never been to the Super Bowl, yet all those teams have been to the playoffs in the last 10 years. Don’t mess with a proven system.

  53. rhinosinsider says: Mar 12, 2012 10:11 AM

    You have to love the “Anything the Redskins do is wrong” logic at play here.

    Yes, the Redskins paid a king’s ransom for the 2nd pick.

    But, if RGIII (or by some strange twist of fate Andrew Luck) turns into the next Rodgers/Brady/Manning level elite QB, the deal will work out for the Redskins.

    And if the Redskins get Vincent Jackson in FA, the Redskins offense could get a lot better in one off season with Chris Cooley likely healthy and the running game looking good at the end of the season.

    Haters gonna hate. But, I’m ready to go get some Superman socks for draft day.

    HTTR

  54. jdouble777 says: Mar 12, 2012 10:12 AM

    We have had how many high 1st round picks in the past 10 years and won how many divisional titles? NFC championships? Super Bowls? Landry, Taylor, Kerrigan, Orakpo, Williams, and so on have all been nice additions and we solid picks at their respective picks going into the draft. However, they all played positions that are not the one that culminates in rings. It is now a passing league which makes the need for higher and ability to obtain a QB exceptionally more difficult. Was it a lot? Yes. Will he fail? Maybe. Did we, like every team who does not, need a franchise QB? Yes. Are those rare and expensive? Absolutely. We have added picks for two years and instilled a jolt of youth, have some money for a couple decent free agents, and a few extra late picks which help soften the blow some. But in the end, getting a elite QB was and is essential…now…there is a good shot that could realisitically happen.

  55. gweez76 says: Mar 12, 2012 10:13 AM

    If I have 3 apples and I trade it for 1 apple how many fewer apples do I have?

  56. beatrixkiddo27 says: Mar 12, 2012 10:14 AM

    Burgandyandgold -

    Seriously bud, I agree with much of what you have said save for the notion that that Eagles, Cowboys, and Giants are all worried about what the Redskins are becoming as a team, especially with the prospect of adding RGIII to your roster.

    I obviously don’t speak for the teams themselves, but as a fan of one the aforementioned teams, I can assure you that we are NOT worried about you adding a rookie QB to your roster. Now, that being said, the Redskins surely have a fierce defense and that is a worrisome aspect about facing your team twice a year. Other than that, please! RGIII may blossom into a fine quarterback some day. He may be a fine QB right out of the gate. But history shows us that rookie QBs are rarely something to worry about. But that’s just me.

  57. gweez76 says: Mar 12, 2012 10:16 AM

    yevrag3535 says:
    Mar 12, 2012 9:52 AM
    Redskins or it that the deadskins will never win with Shanahan. Who ever QB’s them, he is not John Elway and he is the reason they won in Denver, not the crazy finger pointing nut job of a coach.

     You forgot about him being the play caller and O coordinator when Steve Young threw 6 tds to win the Superbowl.

    Belicheck hasn’t even been to the playoffs with out Brady.

    Only 1 coach has won with 2 diff Qbs. Joseph Jackson Gibbs with 3.

    Your argument has no clothes.

  58. erod22 says: Mar 12, 2012 10:29 AM

    So if Goodell acts before the draft and Washington is punished with a first-round pick, do they lose all three picks now?

    Shanahan shouldn’t be able to circumvent the process. The trade shouldn’t be approved until the Bounty-gate matter is settled.

    Especially when Gregg Williams is both the former DC for the Redskins and the current DC of the Rams.

  59. geemoney713 says: Mar 12, 2012 10:31 AM

    I agree with the lottery system for the NFL, but I think 10 picks is WAY too much. I was thinking more like top 3 or top 5 picks.

    The NBA is different because there are so many games. In the NFL you can play the last game of the year and decide exactly which draft pick you will get based on the outcome of the game.

    Also, in the NFL, you’re nearly certain who the top pick in the draft will be at that point and if they’ll fit into your scheme. It’s unfair that someone can dictate whether they get the top pick based on the last couple games. If you’re the worst team and still have the 3rd pick or 5th pick, it can dramatically help your franchise. This would eliminate teams trying to suck to get higher picks.

  60. utteke says: Mar 12, 2012 10:39 AM

    A draft lottery might be a good idea if it was fair and honest. The temptation for the league higher up’s to manipulate it would be just too strong however. Does anyone truly believe that the NBA draft lottery is on the up and up?

  61. illbilliv says: Mar 12, 2012 11:06 AM

    1. Its clearly 2 1st round picks. We have the 2nd pick. 3-1=2. How can anyone say its 3 when we are getting this years #2.

  62. Mr. Wright 212 says: Mar 12, 2012 11:07 AM

    Snyder reverts back to his old ways after that mirage of a one-year hiatus last year. Just when you thought Danny Boy would change ha.

    Didn’t he see what happened further up I-95? Philly tried this free agency game and failed miserably, while the Giants have consistently built from within over the past five years — with two Super Bowl victories to show for it.

  63. Mr. Wright 212 says: Mar 12, 2012 11:09 AM

    utteke says:
    Mar 12, 2012 10:39 AM
    A draft lottery might be a good idea if it was fair and honest. The temptation for the league higher up’s to manipulate it would be just too strong however. Does anyone truly believe that the NBA draft lottery is on the up and up?

    ———

    It’s easy to suggest the lottery is rigged because sour Boston fans hated to see the Knicks get Ewing. But outside of 1985, when have the Lakers or Knicks been able to benefit from the lottery? The Knicks were consistently bad in the 2000s and never had a top overall pick, the Lakers haven’t been bad enough to even need the lottery but once in the past 15 years.

    The only time I thought it was rigged was when LeBron was involved, since everyone knew Cleveland was going to have the pick long before the lottery was even held.

  64. vikingsprimetime says: Mar 12, 2012 11:31 AM

    Your 10 pack sucks and you do to.

  65. skinfangray says: Mar 12, 2012 11:33 AM

    erod22 says: Mar 12, 2012 10:29 AM

    So if Goodell acts before the draft and Washington is punished with a first-round pick, do they lose all three picks now?

    Shanahan shouldn’t be able to circumvent the process. The trade shouldn’t be approved until the Bounty-gate matter is settled.

    Especially when Gregg Williams is both the former DC for the Redskins and the current DC of the Rams.

    -Are you allowed to walk around all day unsupervised? Why would Washington be punished for something that happened years ago, and without the knowledge of team officials? But, I can see why you would be so hopeful of that happening. As competitive as this team was last season with Grossman quarterbacking, watching them with RG3 will be pretty interesting. Unless of course you are a fan of the other NFC East teams.

    Mr. Wright 212 says: Mar 12, 2012 11:07 AM

    Snyder reverts back to his old ways after that mirage of a one-year hiatus last year. Just when you thought Danny Boy would change ha.

    Didn’t he see what happened further up I-95? Philly tried this free agency game and failed miserably, while the Giants have consistently built from within over the past five years — with two Super Bowl victories to show for it.

    -Yeah, his one year hiatus. Please list all of “Snyder’s” free agent signing from 2 seasons ago. Oh, and I guess what you mean by building from within is trading draft picks to select your franchise quarterback, right? Unless of course, you believe that never happened and Eli just fell in your lap for free.

    This garbage has gotten so played out. Please, if you are going to bash the Skins, dream up some new and relevant information.

  66. varnbo says: Mar 12, 2012 11:42 AM

    Earth to whomever wrote point #6.

    The NFL already has a great off-season event that generates plenty of anticipation with a significant TV audience.

    It’s called the NFL draft- check it out.

    Maybe you can help Manning produce a Lebronesque reality show called “The Signing”.

  67. raiders757 says: Mar 12, 2012 11:44 AM

    thetruth113 says: Mar 12, 2012 6:24 AM

    It’s not a matter of semantics

    ——————————-

    The Skins traded THREE first round pics, and a second, for ONE first round pic. It’s still Three pics that were traded. You can call it a swap, or whatever you want, but three first round pics were given up for the right to move up for one slightly higher first round pic.

    By definition, because there is two arguably logical point of views with the math involved in this trade, it is indeed semantics.

  68. matthewcarlson1 says: Mar 12, 2012 11:49 AM

    They could’ve literally gotten any QB in the league except for the Mannings and Stafford for that price. I cannot think of any other team besides the Giants and Lions that wouldn’t gladly accept this King’s Ransom for their QB. They could’ve had Tom Brady for less. This is the Herschel Walker trade of this decade.. The Vikes were screwed after that deal and the Skins will be too, unless Griffin is the next coming of Tebow (haha). I can see the Rams winning a superbowl in the next 5-7 years.

  69. raiders757 says: Mar 12, 2012 11:50 AM

    vaskinsfan says: Mar 12, 2012 7:14 AM

    People who say the Redskins mortgaged their future and have no picks for the next 3 years are just plain ignorant.
    ——————————

    I guess that also means those who claimed the same thing about the Raiders giving up far less for a top ten QB mid way through last season are ignorant as well. Which I fully agree with.

  70. gadgetdawg says: Mar 12, 2012 11:55 AM

    to instruct the coach to give the backups a chance to get some game reps in order to give the front office some film that can be used to help make roster and depth chart decisions in the future.
    —————————————
    I suspect that would happen at times even with a lottery. If the season is pretty much over, why not collect tape against real NFL teams rather than a practice squad? No the reason for a lottery is to prevent teams from flat out throwing games.

  71. cmutimmah says: Mar 12, 2012 11:59 AM

    To move up 4 spots they gave up nearly 3 first round draft picks (their second rounder this year is just outside the first round…)

    Seems to be a lot to give up for RG3… IMO, we cannot rate this move until we see who they could have had in a couple years…

  72. ron69 says: Mar 12, 2012 1:14 PM

    #6 is right on but 10 teams are too many maybe 5 would be ok, expect a suck for Barkley this year.

  73. mightyquinn69 says: Mar 12, 2012 1:53 PM

    If the Redskins end up being a bad team in the next few years, the Rams will have 5 very high forst round draft picks. Could you imagine the Rams have 5 top ten, first round picks in the 3 years? Wow!

  74. tv426 says: Mar 12, 2012 4:45 PM

    vtsquirm says: Mar 12, 2012 8:52 AM
    Ahem, going back to 1998, the year Manning was drafted we have the following 1st round QBs, outside of a few others that were good (McNabb, Pennington, etc) – in order of year, excluding the last 3 as that isn’t enough time to judge anyone:
    JaMarcus Russell
    Brady Quinn
    Vince Young
    Matt Leinart
    Jason Campbell
    Alex Smith (one OK year does not make a great qb)
    Byron Leftwich
    Kyle Boller
    Rex Grossman
    David Carr
    Joey Harrington
    Patrick Ramsey
    Tim Couch
    Akili Smith
    Cade McNown
    Ryan Leaf

    Like I said, the first round is a crap shoot with QBs. For every decent QB (most of the ones you list are decent at best – aka Vick, Cutler) you have at least one that is a total bust.
    Care to have a lottery system and have a club tank games for the likes of anyone on this list? I didn’t think so.

  75. sfm073 says: Mar 12, 2012 6:28 PM

    One, five and six were just completely retarded. Did chris chase write this. Yeah the colts were really tanking it when they won 2 of their last 3.

  76. ramfanaz says: Mar 13, 2012 6:52 PM

    Holy cow, it’s not “semantics” it’s called a FACT – Redskins sent THREE first Round picks and a SECOND round pick, in exchange they receive a FIRST Round pick. NET GAIN = 2 first and a second, not hard people.

  77. ramfanaz says: Mar 13, 2012 6:56 PM

    TV – you left off Rodgers, Ryan, Bradford, Stafford, Rivers, Manning, Flacco, Rothlesburger even Vick to a certain degree

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!