Multiple Number Ones and Drew Brees

[Burgold]

So, I've been hearing a lot of talk about us spending 2 number ones, a number 2, a number 4 and possibly some loose change to grab RGIII and most on this board seem okay with that for the chance at getting a franchise qb. I've been wondering about that in light of Drew Brees.

More and more, I'm hearing that the Saints might franchise Drew because they're havng a tough time coming up with the right numbers. If they do so, the cost of Drew is two number ones which will be less than the cost of getting RGIII (assuming we can draw up a contract that Brees can't refuse).

So, the question is... if Drew is franchised would you rather have him for two number ones or RGIII?

Again, the question isn't whether you think this is plausible, but simply if Brees is franchised would you sign him at the cost of two number ones?

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Yep, I'll take that, though there's a bit of an emotional appeal in having "our" franchise QB for once. But signing Brees for that cheap a price? Gotta take it or at least strongly consider it. He's too good. Healthy, insanely productive, still relatively young, what's not to like?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Yep, I'll take that, though there's a bit of an emotional appeal in having "our" franchise QB for once. But signing Brees for that cheap a price? Gotta take it or at least strongly consider it. He's too good. Healthy, productive, still relatively young, what's not to like?

No.

What makes the astronomical asking price for RGIII acceptable to me is that he *could* be here for 12 years as our long-term answer at QB. So, 3 firsts+ for 12 years of Griffin is easier to swallow than 2 firsts for a few years of Brees.

[FunkedUp]

Hell yeah, reigning league MVP (2X winner), super bowl MVP, at the peak of his career. Sounds like a hell of a lot better than huge risk associated with paying more for RG3. If you did this move, I like the idea of adding Russell Wilson in the 4th or 5th round. Then you tailor a passing game around their similar styles and physical characteristics. Then you have great continuity when the torch is passed.

[clskinsfan]

No.

What makes the astronomical asking price for RGIII acceptable to me is that he *could* be here for 12 years as our long-term answer at QB. So, 3 firsts+ for 12 years of Griffin is easier to swallow than 2 firsts for a few years of Brees.

Key word "could". He COULD just as easily be a bust and set the franchise back for a few years. Brees is a pro bowl QB and will be for the next 5-8 years. It's a no brainer in my opinion. Give up the 2 firsts and get Brees. But I will say I dont see Brees wanting to leave N.O. His roots are very deep in that community.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Another question...do the Saints HAVE to part with Brees if offered 2 firsts? I thought that was what they were allowed to accept, but didn't think it was mandatory that they had to give him up if any team offered the picks. Also, what if 8 teams offer 2 firsts?

[S.T.real,lights,out]

If we could get 5 year out of him i def would do it. He's a great QB and i would love to have him here.

[SkinsFanMania]

Although it would be tempting to have Brees in the burgundy and gold I think I want to draft our franchise qb. Yes due to Brees quick release he would instantly improve our OL. Im hoping for either rg3 or Luck if Indy decides to draft rg3. We would have much more time with rg3 at qb, than with Brees at the helm.

[FunkedUp]

No.

What makes the astronomical asking price for RGIII acceptable to me is that he *could* be here for 12 years as our long-term answer at QB. So, 3 firsts+ for 12 years of Griffin is easier to swallow than 2 firsts for a few years of Brees.

Come on Brees has actually gotten it done at on the biggest stage and is arguably the best QB in the league. What is the probability that RG3 is going to give you three or four years of greatness at any point that you are going to get from Brees in the next 3 to four years. I think 25% chance would be generous.

[S.T.real,lights,out]

Another question...do the Saints HAVE to part with Brees if offered 2 firsts? I thought that was what they were allowed to accept, but didn't think it was mandatory that they had to give him up if any team offered the picks. Also, what if 8 teams offer 2 firsts?

I think they would have to match what we offer him. And i dont think they have the cap space to do it.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

No.

What makes the astronomical asking price for RGIII acceptable to me is that he *could* be here for 12 years as our long-term answer at QB. So, 3 firsts+ for 12 years of Griffin is easier to swallow than 2 firsts for a few years of Brees.

I don't think Brees is a "few years" proposition like Manning would be though. At the same time, he'll give us 6-8 years at maximum, RGIII could give us 15-20.

At the same time, system fit and continuity, level of talent and depth, could all be factors. RGIII is a better system fit out of the box than Brees.

Brees has been in the same system for the past 6 years. He might need an adjustment period here. It'll also take time to build up the kind of talent Brees has in New Orleans. The difference is that Brees could be in his mid to late 30s by the time that's done, RGIII will be 26 or 27.

Now that I think about it, it's not as clear-cut as I made it seem in the first post.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Key word "could". He COULD just as easily be a bust and set the franchise back for a few years. Brees is a pro bowl QB and will be for the next 5-8 years. It's a no brainer in my opinion. Give up the 2 firsts and get Brees. But I will say I dont see Brees wanting to leave N.O. His roots are very deep in that community.

Agreed about the likelihood of success. Brees is hands-down a more likely success. He's also 33 already. So, if we were going to add a veteran and take that approach, I'd rather just sign Manning and not give away the two picks.

So, I guess all I'm really saying is that if we're going to mortgage picks, I'd want it to be for a QB who could be a long-term solution. If we're looking for a 3-5 year fix, then let's do that through FA or something.

[KDawg]

Key word "could". He COULD just as easily be a bust and set the franchise back for a few years. Brees is a pro bowl QB and will be for the next 5-8 years.

Doesn't mean that he will be for us.

Drew Brees is successful for a few reasons in New Orleans:

1) He works his ass off, and is extremely dedicated
2) He's a talented football player
3) He fits EXACTLY what Sean Peyton wants/needs and the Saints offense... To a tee.

There's no possible way to know that Drew Brees will be a pro bowl QB for the next 5-8 years. Injuries occur, look at Manning. If he goes elsewhere, or the Saints offensive dynamic changes, he may not either. There are a ton of variables at play, and that's not to discredit Brees, as I think even the best QBs can go to situations where they aren't the best fit for a team. The argument that Griffin could bust is valid, but Brees could bust in DC as well, depending on a number of factors. Nothing is a sure thing.

That's not to say he'd bust here for sure, but it is to say that you can't with certainty say anything about any of these guys. Stylistically speaking, Griffin fits our current offense better than Brees. Now, anyone who says they'd be upset with Brees coming here is off their rocker. Guy is a football player, and a hard worker. But his fit is less than ideal. (Though he fits better than Manning ;)) I think Brees himself would be better off in New Orleans (and I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell he leaves there anyways).

If he came here, I'd be ecstatic. But I don't think it's in the cards or the best move for the team. The best move is if we can acquire Griffin or Luck, in my humble opinion. Especially considering he's 33 years old.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Come on Brees has actually gotten it done at on the biggest stage and is arguably the best QB in the league. What is the probability that RG3 is going to give you three or four years of greatness at any point that you are going to get from Brees in the next 3 to four years. I think 25% chance would be generous.

I'm not worried about what Griffin would do for 3 years. That's the point. If we're talking "coulds" and "mights" we need to consider that Brees might not be quite as good in our offense. Even if he is pretty close, I think at this point I'd rather have 10+ years of "very good" over 3 years of "great" since we'd be right back in the same boat after those 3 years.

If Brees were a little younger, I think it would make more sense.

[skins island connection]

Brees does bring the ora of confidence to a team, and would surely do that here.
It would be tempting, and even though many are hooked on RGIII, the little man inside my head keeps saying "don't put too much faith in RGIII".
This pesky echo has been bouncing around my head for awhile; maybe its due to past QB's who have fallen flat on their faces, 'building a QB up to fail' would be the ebst way to describe it, I guess.
Brees knows exactly what, who, when, and where to put the ball; this is not the question, and deciding on Brees or RGIII will be a difficult choice, if given, but if forced to with a hot branding iron, I'd lean towards the veteran who has proven it on the field, with no dis-respect to Robert.

Either way we go, one thing is for sure; after this choice has been made, the ONLY thing that should be on the coach's mind is protection, protection, and protection; getting the o-linemen together and issuing the ultimatum of whatever it takes protect our QB, otherwise we may as well put out a ham sammich for Patrick Ramsey...

[countryboy]

I'd take Brees all day long. As dazzling a proposition as RG3 might be, he's a double-uncertainty. 1. It's very debatable whether Shanahan/Allen can offer the Rams more than the Browns if Cleveland decide to trade up and 2. Even if we did get him, there's no guarantee he'd deliver.

Brees is a known quantity, a genuine franchise QB ... and his trade value is actually lower at the point than RG3. Obviously, other teams would want him ... like about 20 other teams. So then it's just a matter of money. And we've got the cap space and Snyder's Magic Wallet, so that's no problem at all ...

[tiger187126]

when people were saying RGIII is different from past moves this is the kind of move they were talking about. giving another team a ton of picks for their player who is already well into his career instead of drafting our own player and letting him develop.

news flash:

there's no guarantee that WAS Brees is going to any near how good NO Brees was. completely different situations and this time you don't get try to develop him if he's not performing up to snuff.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I don't want to give the wrong impression. If things fall a certain way and we end up with Brees QBing this team for a few years, I'm not going to complain at all. I just would PREFER to make a move to set our team up for the long-term. If that looks as though it won't happen and Brees is truly available for 2 firsts, I wouldn't shed any tears about that.

[KDawg]

It's interesting to see how many posters on this forum discount scheme fit and jump to the conclusion that because A happens in location X, A will happen in location Z with absolute certainty.

That's not to say that thought process is necessarily wrong in this case, but it just neglects a lot of real information.

[HTTR F Dallas]

Have to go with RGIII here. Drew Brees is a great quarterback and if we could have had him 2 or 3 years ago, I'd go for that. But he is 33 years old now. Our team is not good enough in the supporting areas to give up 2 first round picks for a 33 year old QB. We need to build this team around a QB and Brees would be 35 or older before we can give him a strong team. I'd rather see RGIII at 24 with all the pieces to compliment him.

[TaylorPickSix]

RG3 or Manning, otherwise we might as well just go back to Rex. I don't think Brees would be as successful here as the other two, unless we completely changed our offense.

I also have to question what kind of emotion baggage he would bring with him if he does leave New Orleans. He finally felt like that was his home, his team.

[Pick6]

We need to think longer term, not short-term. I like Drew Brees a lot and would not be upset if he came here, but I want to go with a new, young guy who could become the face of our franchise. Not for a guy who would finish his career here, but be remembered for everything he did in New Orleans.

[pjfootballer]

I'd love if we got Brees, but I just wish it was 5 years ago when he was 28 when everyone, including us, passed on him. I'll take the young guy. If I don't want a 36 year old Peyton, I don't think I'd want a 33 year old Brees.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I'd love if we got Brees, but I just wish it was 5 years ago when he was 28 when everyone, including us, passed on him. I'll take the young guy. If I don't want a 36 year old Peyton, I don't think I'd want a 33 year old Brees.

Right...and due to the fact that he'd only cost money, in some ways the 36-year old Manning is a better contingency plan.

[KDawg]

Right...and due to the fact that he'd only cost money, in some ways the 36-year old Manning is a better contingency plan.

I don't think either of them are great plans, to be honest :)

Then again, right now I don't think there is any better plan than RG3/Luck. So, if we can't get them, I have a feeling we're going to attempt to trade for someone's young backup QB and sign a vet (like Orton) as well. (I don't like that plan much, either).

[RBClintonPortis]

Yes I would do this. Cheaper in draft picks than RGIII. 3-5 years of not having to be a total homer to belive the playoffs are a possibility every August. 3-5 years of building an entire team and, hopefully, selling out one year to be in a postion to draft our Aaron Rodgers/Steve Young to sit behind Drew for a season or two. Agree that there is no way this happens wrt New Orleans. Still, nice to dream.
BTW Remember the 2005 offseason, when we elected not to pursue Brees, brought in Musgrave to put in the shotgun for Brunnell and drafted Campbell... what might have been...

[LD0506]

It's interesting to see how many posters on this forum discount scheme fit and jump to the conclusion that because A happens in location X, A will happen in location Z with absolute certainty.

That's not to say that thought process is necessarily wrong in this case, but it just neglects a lot of real information.

You must get your commonsense wholesale, this is the crux of any FA signing. Players are not Legos, they do not simply click right into place, haven't we of all fans seen this enough to get the point?

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

It's interesting to see how many posters on this forum discount scheme fit and jump to the conclusion that because A happens in location X, A will happen in location Z with absolute certainty.

That's not to say that thought process is necessarily wrong in this case, but it just neglects a lot of real information.

Indeed. I formally reverse my previous position, no to signing Brees. Brees probably wouldn't be a bust but after looking at the various factors in play, there is just as much of an element of risk to Brees as exists with RGIII. I have confidence that Brees can run any scheme, but will he be the same as he was in New Orleans? It is uncertain. And Brees will give 8 years at most, and maybe 5 of those will be him as a top-shelf QB. RGIII can give 10+ years of top-shelf QB play.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I don't think either of them are great plans, to be honest :)

Then again, right now I don't think there is any better plan than RG3/Luck. So, if we can't get them, I have a feeling we're going to attempt to trade for someone's young backup QB and sign a vet (like Orton) as well. (I don't like that plan much, either).

I don't either...but if a decision came down to Brees for 2 firsts or Manning for an incentive-laden contract, give me Manning.

[KDawg]

You must get your commonsense wholesale, this is the crux of any FA signing. Players are not Legos, they do not simply click right into place, haven't we of all fans seen this enough to get the point?

Apparently not.

This is how I'd evaluate a FA/trade/draft scenario:

1) What is his skillset, is it a match to what I want/need on my roster?
2) What was his production within a similar skillset/situations that he'd be in on my team (and that may mean breaking film down to the point where I'm only looking at plays that are similar to what we run [both from a statistical and film point of view]) If there aren't a lot of plays to sample from where he'd be doing similar things, I have to evaluate honestly and ask: Can he do what I want him to?
3) What is his work ethic/behavior?

From there, if he checks out in all of those, I worry about #4...

4) What will it cost to acquire (anything from money, to draft choices, to time invested)
5) Is it worth it to pull the trigger?

[USS Redskins]

Two number ones for a 33 yr old QB?

I would rather go with RG3 - at least his cap hit wont strangle the team for several years like Brees' would if he tanks.

[wrecker]

I would do it in a heartbeat. That way we could draft a QB in the later rounds to develop behind Brees.
Brees would be good for at least 5 or 6 years.
Hell, we could draft a QB in the later rounds for the next 3 years until we found the one that clicks.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Absolutely not, certainly not for picks.

If the Redskins are trading picks, I want it to be for someone who will be playing in his prime in the '20s

[skinsarel33t]

I don't think Brees is a "few years" proposition like Manning would be though. At the same time, he'll give us 6-8 years at maximum, RGIII could give us 15-20
.

More like 12-15 but I'd still take RG3

---------- Post added March-2nd-2012 at 09:21 AM ----------

Ppl over underestimate the effect age has on players

[wrecker]

Absolutely not, certainly not for picks.

If the Redskins are trading picks, I want it to be for someone who will be playing in his prime in the '20s

.....If RGIII can transition to the NFL. RGIII has the speed, athletic ability and the arm, but can he anticipate and read defenses? Brees is a proven MVP QB and is healthy.
It would give us time to find a diamond in the rough in the later rounds for the next few years while at the same time give the fans something to cheer about.

[SkinsHokieFan]

.....If RGIII can transition to the NFL. RGIII has the speed, athletic ability and the arm, but can he anticipate and read defenses? Brees is a proven MVP QB and is healthy.
It would give us time to find a diamond in the rough in the later rounds for the next few years while at the same time give the fans something to cheer about.

Multiple 1sts for a 33 year old QB who would be coached in a new system?

No thanks, I have seen this movie before

[Boss_Hogg]

sounds like a Vinny move.

[wrecker]

Multiple 1sts for a 33 year old QB who would be coached in a new system?

No thanks, I have seen this movie before

Please don't compare Brees with McNugget.

This is a better example.
I think Brees would do with the Redskins what Warner did for the Cardinals IMO.

The Cardinals only made the mistake of not grooming a replacement for when Warner left.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Please don't compare Brees with McNugget.

This is a better example.
I think Brees would do with the Redskins what Warner did for the Cardinals IMO.

The Cardinals only made the mistake of not grooming a replacement for when Warner left.

Its tough to groom a replacement because Brees takes you out of the running for a replacement.

5 years ago a guy like Christian Ponder slips to round 3 and becomes a "diamond in the rough"

QBs with any sort of talent are now being taken in the top 15. Ryan Tannehill is probably a sure fire 2nd round pick in the 2002 draft

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Key word "could". He COULD just as easily be a bust and set the franchise back for a few years. Brees is a pro bowl QB and will be for the next 5-8 years. .

Drew Brees MIGHT be here for the next 5-8 years....or his skills could just as easily diminish in the next year or two.

He is 33 after all.

"Father Time is undefeated". :2cents:

[wrecker]

Hypothetical.....

RGIII doesn't exist.

Drew Brees or Rex Grossman?

[21HailStorm]

I'll say no, mainly becuase I've already sold myself on us getting a brand new franchise QB in the draft.

But if you need another reason why not...

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w216/stanleje/Capture-1.png

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

As great as DB is, I think I would prefer RG3. I want the qb to be "our" guy through and through. We missed our chance to get DB when he was available, that's our bad. THAT would be a typical skins move. Trading up to draft RG3 would not imo.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Its tough to groom a replacement because Brees takes you out of the running for a replacement.

5 years ago a guy like Christian Ponder slips to round 3 and becomes a "diamond in the rough"

QBs with any sort of talent are now being taken in the top 15. Ryan Tannehill is probably a sure fire 2nd round pick in the 2002 draft

I'd say you're wrong about that.

It's just a few teams reaching for 2nd round caliber QBs. People considered a guy like Sanchez a top 15ish prospect and the Jets took him at 5. But in 2002, Tannehill would have been drafted #3 over Harrington and would have challenged Carr for #1. He's light-years better than Harrington was as a prospect, and his athleticism would have gotten him hyped.

[#98QBKiller]

Brees has been an excellent QB, but I feel the same way about this as I do about Manning. It would be a typical Redskins move to throw away draft picks on a player that has minimal future left in the league, and neither of those QBs would likely have the same success here that they've had in their own systems, in the primes of their careers. It would almost certainly blow up in our faces.

If we're talking about trading two firsts for Luck or RG3, then I'm on board for that because it represents making an investment for the future.

[pjfootballer]

Anybody know the story behind Brees scar on his face?

[Drastik]

So, I've been hearing a lot of talk about us spending 2 number ones, a number 2, a number 4 and possibly some loose change to grab RGIII and most on this board seem okay with that for the chance at getting a franchise qb. I've been wondering about that in light of Drew Brees.

More and more, I'm hearing that the Saints might franchise Drew because they're havng a tough time coming up with the right numbers. If they do so, the cost of Drew is two number ones which will be less than the cost of getting RGIII (assuming we can draw up a contract that Brees can't refuse).

So, the question is... if Drew is franchised would you rather have him for two number ones or RGIII?

Again, the question isn't whether you think this is plausible, but simply if Brees is franchised would you sign him at the cost of two number ones?
Drew Brees is 33 years old

RGIII turned 22 years old two weeks ago

Close thread

[Hail Em Up]

Anybody know the story behind Brees scar on his face?


I think thats a birth mark.

[FunkedUp]

It's interesting to see how many posters on this forum discount scheme fit and jump to the conclusion that because A happens in location X, A will happen in location Z with absolute certainty.

That's not to say that thought process is necessarily wrong in this case, but it just neglects a lot of real information.

Isn't the scheme risk of RG3 significantly greater than Brees? I think the Saints offense is much closer to what we would run with Brees than Baylor's offense is to the offense we would run with RG3.

[skinsfansince1988]

NO more retreads. I want a QB that will be here for 10-15 years that will be a Redskin, that is his team ala Darrell Green

[Skinz4Life12]

we should have gotten Brees when we had the chance all those years ago, not now.

RGIII or bust!!!

[wrecker]

NO more retreads. I want a QB that will be here for 10-15 years that will be a Redskin, that is his team ala Darrell Green

I'll admit that would be extremely hard to adjust to. :ols:

[skinsfansince1988]

I'll admit that would be extremely hard to adjust to. :ols:

it would but I believe that is the plan, I don't think we are going for Manning or Flynn, I think it is RG3 or Tannehill

[KDawg]

Isn't the scheme risk of RG3 significantly greater than Brees? I think the Saints offense is much closer to what we would run with Brees than Baylor's offense is to the offense we would run with RG3.

No. RG3 has the physical tools to be better on the move in our high to low read boot offensive scheme. Skillset wise, Griffin fits better than Brees. Though Brees wouldn't be a terrible fit, especially because his height becomes less of a factor when he's outside the pocket on those boot action plays. In fact, Brees would fit fairly decently. Griffin is faster, more athletic and is more of a threat to run, which makes his dual threat ability more of a threat to defenses. Even Luck has that over Brees.

Brees ran a 4.83 when he went through the combine. I'd bet he's slowed slightly since then. Luck ran a 4.67 and Griffin ran a 4.41.

Brees had a 32" vert, Griffin had a 39" vert, Luck had a 36"

Brees had a 8'9" broad jump, Griffin had a 10' broad jump, Luck had a 10'4" broad jump.

Athletically speaking, both of the top QBs are ahead of Brees.

From a football standpoint, there is an argument with Griffin at the very least. He hasn't played in a pro style, he was in a spread type offense. But that comes down to the interview process and what our coaches believe they can do.

Brees has an outstanding release, and is elusive in the pocket... But Griffin/Luck will play better on the run, specifically due to their dual threat abilities.

It then comes down to age... Which would you rather have: An athletic, nothing but good things said about his work ethic 22ish year old (Griffin or Luck) or a slightly less athletic, nothing but good things said about his work ethic 33 year old?

[wrecker]

No. RG3 has the physical tools to be better on the move in our high to low read boot offensive scheme. Skillset wise, Griffin fits better than Brees. Though Brees wouldn't be a terrible fit, especially because his height becomes less of a factor when he's outside the pocket on those boot action plays. In fact, Brees would fit fairly decently. Griffin is faster, more athletic and is more of a threat to run, which makes his dual threat ability more of a threat to defenses. Even Luck has that over Brees.

Brees ran a 4.83 when he went through the combine. I'd bet he's slowed slightly since then. Luck ran a 4.67 and Griffin ran a 4.41.

Brees had a 32" vert, Griffin had a 39" vert, Luck had a 36"

Brees had a 8'9" broad jump, Griffin had a 10' broad jump, Luck had a 10'4" broad jump.

Athletically speaking, both of the top QBs are ahead of Brees.

From a football standpoint, there is an argument with Griffin at the very least. He hasn't played in a pro style, he was in a spread type offense. But that comes down to the interview process and what our coaches believe they can do.

Brees has an outstanding release, and is elusive in the pocket... But Griffin/Luck will play better on the run, specifically due to their dual threat abilities.

It then comes down to age... Which would you rather have: An athletic, nothing but good things said about his work ethic 22ish year old (Griffin or Luck) or a slightly less athletic, nothing but good things said about his work ethic 33 year old?


Athleticism and measurables do not make a quality QB. Being able to read defenses and getting rid of the ball when you are supposed to does.

The question there lies....a 33 year old MVP proven QB that can win and will be out of the league in 5-7 years or a 22 year old unproven QB that may not win and could be out of the league in 3 - 4 years?
If RGIII was there at 6 it would be a no brainer but in this case I would go with the better odds.

[hawgboy]

I'm still in the "Draft our Future" camp, but I'd feel better with Brees than I would Manning until I see Manning put on his own Pro Day on NFL Network.

[Son of Gadsden]

Well, I don't know about this. But what we can factually rule out is Weeden. Someone reported that Shanahan loves Weeden.

He hasn't mentioned Brees, so maybe. :ols:

[KDawg]

Athelticism and measurables do not make a quality QB. Being able to read defenses and getting rid of the ball when you are supposed to does.

Did I say they did?

No.

So please, don't try to run with something that was never implied.

The implication was that these two are top prospects for a reason. The interview process will determine how well they can make reads/get the coaching staffs opinion on the players ability to do so. In college, neither guy had a penchant for throwing interceptions, so they can certainly make reads. How complex they can get in their reads is a different story altogether.

However, both guys have shown they can throw the ball, Griffin led the NCAA in completion percentage on long passes, I believe. If anyone has a link that backs that up or says otherwise, I'd appreciate it. They both have extremely high completion percentages in general.

Can it carryover to the pros? Who knows? I'd say yes. But it's really a guess. But they have solid fundamentals and throwing mechanics.

Their athleticism puts them over the top as far as fit for scheme goes.

[SWFLSkins]

A bird in the hand or two in the bush? hmm, yeah I will take the bird in the hand all day long.

[clskinsfan]

Athleticism and measurables do not make a quality QB. Being able to read defenses and getting rid of the ball when you are supposed to does.

The question there lies....a 33 year old MVP proven QB that can win and will be out of the league in 5-7 years or a 22 year old unproven QB that may not win and could be out of the league in 3 - 4 years?
If RGIII was there at 6 it would be a no brainer but in this case I would go with the better odds.


Agreed. Also keep in mind accuracy. RG3 has shown some incredible accuracy in college. DB is perhaps the most accurate QB in NFL history. I still think Brees is the smart choice if you have to surrender 2 1st's. With RG3 its gonna cost more than two 1st's. But like I said, its a mute point. Brees isnt leaving N.O.

[wrecker]

So please, don't try to run with something that was never implied.

Sorry if I interpreted all the measurable stats you quoted as implying that physical skills were more relevant than a proven QB.

[HBnotBlades]

Isn't the scheme risk of RG3 significantly greater than Brees? I think the Saints offense is much closer to what we would run with Brees than Baylor's offense is to the offense we would run with RG3.

I think the biggest problem is that we won't have the players/scheme in place to take full advantage of either players skills in the first year. If it takes 2-3 years to surround a QB with all the tools to be dominant Brees will be 35 or 36.

At that point, what are the odds that Brees is still playing at an pro bowl level? I'd probably put it around 50% chance that he'll still be among the very best, but based on past results isn't there also an above 50% chance that a top 3 pick in the draft QB (RG3) will also reach that level? Not to mention that we'll have a younger player for much longer.

[skins island connection]

I am pretty sure there will be other good QB's coming out of college in the next few years, so its not an absolute ' RGIII or bust' scenario; well, maybe for the upcoming year.
His atleticism is good, if not great, but proven track records trumps that in my book. RGIII's abilities to run are helpful, and we've heard the debates regarding running vs pocket QB's and its almost a landslide on the winner in that catagory.
Brees has the "it", which makes him a good QB, and causes defenses to alter their gameplans when playing against him.
RGIII has the "if", and IF he can continue his success in the NFL, great, but taking chances is part of the game; it just depends on which direction and how you want to get there. Brees knows the path, RGIII wants to run the path; can he? will he?
I guess we'll find out soon enough, draft day is coming, and I'm as nervous as a pregnant nun to see the outcome...

[wrecker]

I think the biggest problem is that we won't have the players/scheme in place to take full advantage of either players skills in the first year. If it takes 2-3 years to surround a QB with all the tools to be dominant Brees will be 35 or 36.

At that point, what are the odds that Brees is still playing at an pro bowl level? I'd probably put it around 50% chance that he'll still be among the very best, but based on past results isn't there also an above 50% chance that a top 3 pick in the draft QB (RG3) will also reach that level? Not to mention that we'll have a younger player for much longer.

If we landed Brees we could adequately surround him with players in FA and the draft this year. We would only be giving up our #1 this year and would have the rest of the draft and FA to upgrade talent and depth.
For comparison Brees > ?Manning?>McNabb> Grossman

[RWJ]

So, I've been hearing a lot of talk about us spending 2 number ones, a number 2, a number 4 and possibly some loose change to grab RGIII and most on this board seem okay with that for the chance at getting a franchise qb. I've been wondering about that in light of Drew Brees.

More and more, I'm hearing that the Saints might franchise Drew because they're havng a tough time coming up with the right numbers. If they do so, the cost of Drew is two number ones which will be less than the cost of getting RGIII (assuming we can draw up a contract that Brees can't refuse).

So, the question is... if Drew is franchised would you rather have him for two number ones or RGIII?

Again, the question isn't whether you think this is plausible, but simply if Brees is franchised would you sign him at the cost of two number ones?



No contest. Give me RG3.:)

[GibbsFactor]

Anybody know the story behind Brees scar on his face?

It's a mole he had removed.


Is it as easy as offering up the franchise tag price and then making the Saints match it and he's ours? I think they have to agree to accept it right?

[SkinsHokieFan]

I'd say you're wrong about that.

It's just a few teams reaching for 2nd round caliber QBs. People considered a guy like Sanchez a top 15ish prospect and the Jets took him at 5. But in 2002, Tannehill would have been drafted #3 over Harrington and would have challenged Carr for #1. He's light-years better than Harrington was as a prospect, and his athleticism would have gotten him hyped.

Its still a small sample size, but I think people are going to start to reach more and more for 2nd/3rd round QBs in round 1.

Harrington had a remarkeable career at Oregon and great athleticsm, along with a fantastic performance in a BCS game (Fiesta Bowl) He had serious hype

And David Carr that season, oh my gosh, he was ridiculous

[Crazy Levi]

Honestly, no. Don't want him.

Brees IS New Orleans. He isn't DC. I have no doubt that some stellar power play to bring him here would result in failure.

Brees doesn't belong here, he belongs in New Orleans. And while he isn't ancient, he's no spring chicken either.

Flynn or RG3 - two promising guys under 30 - are the guys I want us to make a run at.

We need someone who's story really STARTS here, not ends here.

[wrecker]

Honestly, no. Don't want him.

Brees IS New Orleans. He isn't DC. I have no doubt that some stellar power play to bring him here would result in failure.

Brees doesn't belong here, he belongs in New Orleans. And while he isn't ancient, he's no spring chicken either.

Flynn or RG3 - two promising guys under 30 - are the guys I want us to make a run at.

We need someone who's story really STARTS here, not ends here.


I loved it when Doug Williams ended here. :)

Another note....if we could snag Brees AND Colston?

[pjfootballer]

It's a mole he had removed.


Is it as easy as offering up the franchise tag price and then making the Saints match it and he's ours? I think they have to agree to accept it right?

Wow, that thing must have been huge.

[wrecker]

Wow, that thing must have been huge.


http://www.tintdude.com/images/AustinPowers_Mole.jpg

---------- Post added March-2nd-2012 at 12:33 PM ----------

I found this interesting......


Brees not good enough for Loomis?

The signing of Drew Brees has gone from a no-brainer to something more complicated in a hurry. It took a natural disaster for the New Orleans Saints to be desperate enough to sign [Brees] in 2006. Six glorious years later, the team is privately trying to sell itself on the notion that Brees is simply a "very good" quarterback. That was the word coming out of the NFL scouting combine this past week, when Saints general manager Mickey Loomis tried to define Brees as "very good" when the quarterback was called "great," according to three league sources. All three sources were asking Loomis why it was taking so long to sign Brees to a contract extension. Loomis' answer spoke volumes.

NFL.com


Read more: http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/nfl#ixzz1nyvZxAua

[pjfootballer]

If the Saints don't re-sign Brees, Loomis will go down as the biggest idiot in the history of the NFL and could have just played himself into early retirement with this. Who would hire the guy who won't re-sign the only guy who singlehandedly turned an entire franchise around and made the relevant for the first time in their history?

[wrecker]

If the Saints don't re-sign Brees, Loomis will go down as the biggest idiot in the history of the NFL and could have just played himself into early retirement with this. Who would hire the guy who won't re-sign the only guy who singlehandedly turned an entire franchise around and made the relevant for the first time in their history?

Kind of like what Peyton Manning did in Indy?......post Baltimore of course.

[jeronimobrat]

Brees would be sweeeeeettttt but I don't see it happening.

It is not worth the gamble as much as say trading up for RG3...

[HailGreen28]

Brees is 33. If he was guaranteed to play at present level for the next 5 years, it would be a no-brainer (YES).

I'm torn, personally, which to take if we had the opportunity.

[GibbsFactor]

Wow, that thing must have been huge.

It was. Look back at his Purdue days. It was real big and scary. :ols:

[myzhi]

If the price is right, no brainer decision. I would take Brees who currently is still at the top of his game over RGIII who you hope can become like Brees in a few years. Now, if Brees was coming back from in injure or at the downturn of his career, that would be another story, by that's not the case.

[kiingspadee]

Here's the problem - we would be losing two first round picks....with trading up for RG3 we are SWAPPING first round picks

---------- Post added March-2nd-2012 at 01:33 PM ----------

Also - we would not be addressing the long term answer at QB but rather another band-aid....go get RG3

---------- Post added March-2nd-2012 at 01:35 PM ----------


Honestly, no. Don't want him.

Brees IS New Orleans. He isn't DC. I have no doubt that some stellar power play to bring him here would result in failure.

Brees doesn't belong here, he belongs in New Orleans. And while he isn't ancient, he's no spring chicken either.

Flynn or RG3 - two promising guys under 30 - are the guys I want us to make a run at.

We need someone who's story really STARTS here, not ends here.

Flynn is not promising

[KDawg]

Wow, that thing must have been huge.


It was. Look back at his Purdue days. It was real big and scary. :ols:

Taken out of context thread is calling... :ols: :ols: :ols:

[myzhi]

Here's the problem - we would be losing two first round picks....with trading up for RG3 we are SWAPPING first round picks

---------- Post added March-2nd-2012 at 01:33 PM ----------

Also - we would not be addressing the long term answer at QB but rather another band-aid....go get RG3

Rams want Eli Manning type picks which means at least 2 #1, this year and next, plus more.

And, the chance to get franchise QB, even top 5, is only ~50% so it's not a sure bet with RGIII. Brees vs RGIII, way safer bet is Brees.

[TheGreek1973]

some of you guys I think forget that yea in terms of picks RGIII costs more but in terms of money he is REAL cheap to what Brees would cost. Hell we sign him and there goes our cap space without signing anyone else probably...

[myzhi]

some of you guys I think forget that yea in terms of picks RGIII costs more but in terms of money he is REAL cheap to what Brees would cost. Hell we sign him and there goes our cap space without signing anyone else probably...

Last I read, we had 49 million in cap space. Signing Brees won't even take half of that. We will probably do what we have always done. Big signing bonus and backend loaded contract which means his cap hit for next few years would be under $10 million per year.

[wrecker]

Here's the problem - we would be losing two first round picks....with trading up for RG3 we are SWAPPING first round picks[COLOR="Gold"]

I don't understand your logic. Either way swapping or not it will still be 2 first round picks for a QB.

If you read the OP, the debate is would Brees be worth 2 first round picks ONLY more than RGIII be worth 2 first round picks plus multiple other high picks?
The logic being we would have a proven high quality QB and still have the rest of our picks 2-7 in the next two drafts.

[Mad Mike]

So, I've been hearing a lot of talk about us spending 2 number ones, a number 2, a number 4 and possibly some loose change to grab RGIII and most on this board seem okay with that for the chance at getting a franchise qb. I've been wondering about that in light of Drew Brees.

More and more, I'm hearing that the Saints might franchise Drew because they're havng a tough time coming up with the right numbers. If they do so, the cost of Drew is two number ones which will be less than the cost of getting RGIII (assuming we can draw up a contract that Brees can't refuse).

So, the question is... if Drew is franchised would you rather have him for two number ones or RGIII?

Again, the question isn't whether you think this is plausible, but simply if Brees is franchised would you sign him at the cost of two number ones?

Hell no.

I like Brees. He's a great QB in many ways but no way in hell I give up 2 #1s for a QB on the BACKSIDE if his career. My feeling (and I believe the feeling of the Saints) is that as an undersized QB without a canon for an arm when he starts his end of career slide it's going to happen fast.

And what do you think the saints would do with those picks?.... Draft RG3. :doh:

[RiggosMohawk]

Assuming RG3 and Luck are off the table as options...

If the price tag is 2 first round picks, I would vote no
If the price tag is 1 first round pick, and either next year's second or a later round pick this year, I would vote yes.

Again, that's assuming we have no shot at either RG3 or Luck.

Payton and Bress just click together, which leads to 5400 yards and 46 TDs. I have no doubts that we would not get that type of production out of him... but I would still think that given his diversified talents, and the offensive smarts in our coaching staff, he's still good for 4K and 28 TDs every season.

I would give up the picks I mentioned above for that type of QB production. Given Brees' age it gives us a solid 4 year window to make a SB push. Those projected numbers and the 4 year window doesn't seem like a lot in the league nowadays, but given our defensive talent, we're in the drivers seat for the division every single season with QB play like that.

The Shannys have shown numerous times they make the RBBC work - we aren't hamstrung there with large contracts, or tied to finding a homerun threat. Obviously Brees is great at spreading the love in the passing game, so just bring one (just one) legit #1 WR in (FA or draft) to force some favorable matchups, and let Brees play like he does. Stock the shelves with lineman and DBs, and I really think we would be division front-runners, SB contenders after year 1.

[bulldog]

Brees is 33 years old and he isn't leaving NO. This is strictly contract posturing by both sides.

Agreed on Flynn - he was a former #7 pick of the Packers in 2008. He has been hyped to the heavens because of two games performance, one of which at the end of last year didn't mean ANYTHING to the Packers, whose coaching staff allowed him to throw the ball 50 times.

Anyone remember John Friesz, the free agent from San Diego, that started here for Norv in 1994? He had some big games in terms of passing yardage and touchdowns but he was playing on a team that was pretty bad and his stats were inflated due to the open style of play the team was employing to try and stay competitive.

So, Flynn goes from last round pick to organizational savior in two quick steps?

The hype surrounding Flynn reminds me a LOT of the hype that was surrounding Kevin Kolb last year.

John Clayton and the ESPN crew were talking about how much he would upgrade the Cardinals on offense and bring back the bang-bang attack they had with Kurt Warner, etc.

Well, now the Cardinals evidently are in the market for a quarterback again!

The Eagles are laughing. They were able to pawn off one over the hill quarterback in Donovan McNabb and one bust in Kevin Kolb on teams and recoup 3 high draft choices and a pro bowl cornerback.

What a joke.

[jflow78]

This is the ONLY way I'd feel semi okay with this. If we traded back before we traded our 2 first rounders for Brees. If we could trade back to the teens or 20s and then trade for Brees with those 2 firsts, keep all the extra picks from that trade, then I'd be okay with it, but still not really happy.

We'd be giving up 2 first round picks for, AT MOST, 5 years of service. If RG3 is a big hit, then we could have him for 15 years of service. To me, I'd rather have the young guy who might be our QB for 15 years than a guy that could be our QB for 3-4. Brees is the sure thing, but this is what got us in trouble years before, trading high picks for vets. Vinny would be all over this move, something tells me Allen and Shanahan won't.

---------- Post added March-2nd-2012 at 03:30 PM ----------


Agreed on Flynn - he was a former #7 pick of the Packers in 2008. He has been hyped to the heavens because of two games performance, one of which at the end of last year didn't mean ANYTHING to the Packers, whose coaching staff allowed him to throw the ball 50 times.

Anyone remember John Friesz, the free agent from San Diego, that started here for Norv in 1994? He had some big games in terms of passing yardage and touchdowns but he was playing on a team that was pretty bad and his stats were inflated due to the open style of play the team was employing to try and stay competitive.

This is off topic, but John Friesz had huge stats because his team was always behind, teams were playing prevent defense against the Skins a lot (I would assume), and his stats never mattered. Flynn had huge stats because the Packers were running a pass first, big play offense, that torched everyone, and he has superstars as receivers, but he did it against a team playing for a playoff spot, not a team in prevent. I think both guys had/have talent, but their situations are completely the opposite IMO.

However, I don't want either of them on the Redskins this year.

---------- Post added March-2nd-2012 at 03:31 PM ----------


Assuming RG3 and Luck are off the table as options...

If the price tag is 2 first round picks, I would vote no
If the price tag is 1 first round pick, and either next year's second or a later round pick this year, I would vote yes.

Again, that's assuming we have no shot at either RG3 or Luck.

I like this even better, especially if we can do it after trading out of the top 10 or 15 in the first round.

[kiingspadee]

I don't understand your logic. Either way swapping or not it will still be 2 first round picks for a QB.

If you read the OP, the debate is would Brees be worth 2 first round picks ONLY more than RGIII be worth 2 first round picks plus multiple other high picks?
The logic being we would have a proven high quality QB and still have the rest of our picks 2-7 in the next two drafts.

but it's not the long term answer

[pjfootballer]

some of you guys I think forget that yea in terms of picks RGIII costs more but in terms of money he is REAL cheap to what Brees would cost. Hell we sign him and there goes our cap space without signing anyone else probably...

And RG3 would give us more years.


Last I read, we had 49 million in cap space. Signing Brees won't even take half of that. We will probably do what we have always done. Big signing bonus and backend loaded contract which means his cap hit for next few years would be under $10 million per year.

That's Vinny contracts. Backloading only gets you in trouble in future years. Bruce is very good at finding loopholes in the cap. He's a very good cap manager.

[skins island connection]

Brees is 33. If he was guaranteed to play at present level for the next 5 years, it would be a no-brainer (YES).

I'm torn, personally, which to take if we had the opportunity.

Interesting point; but even RGIII isn't 'guaranteed', anymore than Brees is.
Also, consideration has to be put on the other 10 guys on the field as well; RGIII will come in wet and young, [ please don't, its friday] and will need absolute time to learn the system and the speed in the pros, which will be about 1-1/2 years, maybe a little more. Brees can come in and take over immediately, which bodes well for the win now crowd. And honestly I think there are quite a few who will throw in the towel on RGIII within the first 10 games if the losing continues; we all know how ANY player can be mutiniated [ is that a word?] if they don't pan out success from the get-go.

Whoever comes in, I will be happy because its not Rex, and at least a chance to win will be high for many, but i'm just not that sold on RGIII, and its a good thing i'm not the coach; if we get him, I hope he lights it up and has immediate and quality success, but i'm not putting all of my eggs in his basket as of yet...

[Ynot]

Get Brees and Daniels from NO... Draft Russell Wilson late. Between Daniels, Wilson that would give us 20 years of great quarterbacking

? does it have to be this years first rounder?

[bentskin]

Hell yeah, reigning league MVP (2X winner), super bowl MVP, at the peak of his career. Sounds like a hell of a lot better than huge risk associated with paying more for RG3. If you did this move, I like the idea of adding Russell Wilson in the 4th or 5th round. Then you tailor a passing game around their similar styles and physical characteristics. Then you have great continuity when the torch is passed.

No thanks.
The other part that makes handing over 2 #1s and change for the rook is he will only get a 5 yr $23M deal with about $15M guaranteed. Brees will cost you the draft picks ++++++++++ a HUGE contract in the 6 yr $100M range with about half guaranteed for an albeit excellent but aging player.
I like Brees and thought SD nailed it when they got LT in the first and Brees in 2nd but I would not do that deal. Maybe for this years First and Fourth but that would be it. And I only do that if the Browns get the Rams #2 and Griffin is off the table.

HTTR

[Rdskns2000]

Forget about picks; what if Drew Brees were a free agent?

One of the possible punishments for the breaking Saints scandal could be a stripping away of the Saints franchise tender. Highly unlikely Goodell would go that far but you never know. If Brees were truely available, he'd be the number one free agent.


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

[Dirt]

lol people are getting pretty ahead of themselves with this Brees thing. Yes it is highly unlikely that the league takes their franchise tag, and also unlikely that Brees is franchised with the intent of trading. I say forget about Brees.

[Oldskool]

Drew Brees - QB - Saints

League sources tell the New Orleans Times-Picayune the Saints offered free agent Drew Brees an extension "in the range" of $18 million per year last season, and have since increased their offer.

According to the Times-Picayune, the "sticking point" in negotiations might come from the way Peyton Manning's (soon to be voided) extension was structured. The five-year, $90 million pact was designed to pay Manning at least $23 million per season over the first three years. If Brees is intent on matching or surpassing that (after he is presumably franchise tagged), talks that have stagnated since last summer could drag on well into free agency.

Source: New Orleans Times-Picayune Mar 3 - 10:55 AM

[Jericho]

lol people are getting pretty ahead of themselves with this Brees thing. Yes it is highly unlikely that the league takes their franchise tag, and also unlikely that Brees is franchised with the intent of trading. I say forget about Brees.

Agreed. While I admit that Brees is certainly worth 2 first rounders, it's not realistic to expect the Redskins to sign him and the Saints NOT to match. The league won't take away the tag either. And no reason for the Saints to trade him. He's franchised, meaning they either match or have him sign the tender. If Brees really wants to hold out he can, but let's be realistic here. This will all get sorted out, probably sooner rather than later.

Also, as had been stated. If one is signing a veteran, I'd rather go after Manning for zero picks than get involved in a no win situation with Brees.

[RBClintonPortis]

So, does the Williams situation make you think it is more likely New Orleans lets Brees go?

I can see them saying: We are going to lose high picks (at least a 1 and 2 and probably more), most of our defense will be suspended for significant time next season, lets blow this up and start over, & we need all the pciks we can get.

I think it makes it less likely though, I think they will say : We have no way to rebuild now, we can't take the extra hit of letting the face of the franchise go, we are what we will be for next couple of seasons.

So this killed any slim hope the skins had of getting Brees (& I was suprised by the number of you who will say "good" to that)

[nonniey]

Yep, I'll take that, though there's a bit of an emotional appeal in having "our" franchise QB for once. But signing Brees for that cheap a price? Gotta take it or at least strongly consider it. He's too good. Healthy, insanely productive, still relatively young, what's not to like?

Er when it comes to football Brees most definately is not young, relatively or otherwise. He's 33, it would be reasonable to expect 3-5 more years from him. I would prefer Griffen over Bree's, despite the cost in picks.

[Coolio47]

Sorry to disappoint you guys:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8275c9d5/article/saints-use-franchise-tender-on-brees-qbs-figure-144-million?module=HP11_breaking_news


Saints use franchise tender on Brees; QB's figure $14.4 million
NFL.com
Published: March 3, 2012 at 03:50 p.m.
Updated: March 3, 2012 at 04:02 p.m

The New Orleans Saints have used their franchise tag on quarterback Drew Brees, the team announced Saturday.

Brees was designated an exclusive rights franchise player, which prevents Brees from having the ability to negotiate with other teams and secures him as the Saints quarterback in 2012.

[HailB&G]

Per PFT:

"Jay Glazer of FOX reports that the Saints have applied the franchise tag to quarterback Drew Brees.

A league source tells PFT that it’s the exclusive version of the tag, which prevents Brees from talking to any other teams — and which eliminates the risk of some other franchise offering Brees a huge contract and giving the Saints two first-round picks if the Saints choose not to match."

Brees is off the table.

[rk3025]

I'm with you forget Brees and get Flynn then draft Weeden and use picks on needs.

[BadKarma]

Just as well, what makes Manning appealing to me is that we get to add a HOF QB AND keep all our draft picks. Gotta think that thought is weighing on the Redskin FO as they look to put together the best possible team for 2012.