Drafting a franchise QB from the Redskins draft slot: what 25 years of history tells us

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Last year I would have traded 2 full drafts for Sam Bradford, and this year might be tempted to do it again for Andrew Luck. By full drafts, I mean all available picks, rounds 1-3.

However, this year I don't see the Panthers giving up the pick, assuming they pick #1, and I don't see Shanahan offering what would be required.

So, we move on to Plan B. Elsewhere I've made the argument for Rex Grossman as starter. Here I simply give you History's Guide to QBs Picked in the Redskin Slot.

"Redskin Slot" is defined as the higher of:

• 3rd QB picked in the first round, or
• First QB picked with pick #6 or lower

This presumes that 2 QBs will be picked in the first 5 picks, and the Redskins will draft #6 or lower. The actual scenario could be worse. As many as 3 QBs could be picked before the Redskins pick, and the Redskins might pick as low as #10.

Here we go. Meet the future Redskin franchise QBs, from 25 years of history!

2010: Tim Tebow (#25, second QB after Sam Bradford)
2009: Josh Freeman (#17, third QB. Mark Sanchez was #5)
2008: Joe Flacco (#18, second QB after Matt Ryan)
2007: Brady Quinn (#22, second QB after JaMarcus Russell)
2006: Matt Leinart (#10, second QB after Vince Young)
2005: Aaron Rodgers (#24, second QB after Alex Smith)
2004: Ben Roethlisberger (#11, third QB after Eli Manning and Philip Rivers)
2003: Byron Leftwich (#7, second QB after Carson Palmer)
2002: Patrick Ramsey (#32, third QB after David Carr & Joey Harrington)
2001: N/A no qualifiers
2000: N/A no qualifiers
1999: Akili Smith (#3, third QB after Tim Couch & Donovan McNabb)
1998: N/A no qualfiers. Ryan Leaf #2, second QB after Peyton Manning
1997: N/A no qualifiers
1996: N/A no qualifiers
1995: N/A no qualifiers. Kerry Collins #5 after Steve McNair.
1994: Trent Dilfer (#6, second QB after Heath Schuler)
1993: N/A no qualifiers. Rick Mirer #2, second QB after Drew Bledsoe.
1992: Tommy Maddox (#25, second QB after David Klinger)
1991: Todd Marinovich (#24, second QB after Dan McGuire)
1990: Andre Ware (#7, second QB after Jeff George)
1989: N/A no qualifiers
1988: N/A no qualiifers
1987: Kelly Stouffer (#6, second QB after Vinny Testaverde)
1986: Chuck Long (#12, second QB after Jim Everett)

Summing up:

• 25 drafts
• 4 drafts with franchise QBs available & chosen in / around Redskin slot
• 21 drafts with busts in Redskin slot or not even a 2nd QB chosen in first round
• Odds of hitting franchise QB: 16%

I wanted Sam Bradford last year, and I want Andrew Luck this year. Assuming that we aren't getting Luck, history tells us that picking "the next best thing" has about a 16% chance of working out, and 84% chance of saddling the team with an expensive bust who costs a pick better used for another position.

There is no second place in the franchise QB derby, at the top of the draft. Either you win big, or it's a disaster that scars the franchise for years. You don't get 90% of a franchise QB by missing: you get 100% of a 4-year hangover.

Drafting a franchise QB is a dream come true. Wanting that dream does not make it happen, and using a high #1 pick on wishful thinking has 84% odds of making things much worse.

The Redkins simply don't suck enough to be rewarded with a franchise QB.

So says history.

If Grossman doesn't regress badly and immediately, he's the obvious Redskins starting QB for the next four years under the Shanahan regime. If he does regress badly in the next 2 games, then I'd look long and hard at trading whatever is required for Andrew Luck.

It's all about the next two games. Either Grossman performs, or all chips should be on the table for Andrew Luck.

[Duckus]

I said this in another thread, but there is nothing worse than being really bad but going 5-11, 6-10 or 7-9. If you are going to suck, go big. Go 2-14 or 3-13. It is your best chance to grab a franchise QB. There is nothing worse for a franchise than slowly dying with 7-9 or 8-8 records, drafting 10th through 15th and never being bad enough to grab a game changing franchise player.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

I said this in another thread, but there is nothing worse than being really bad but going 5-11, 6-10 or 7-9. If you are going to suck, go big. Go 2-14 or 3-13. It is your best chance to grab a franchise QB. There is nothing worse for a franchise than slowly dying with 7-9 or 8-8 records, drafting 10th through 15th and never being bad enough to grab a game changing franchise player.

Which is why we should have started IRing guys and putting in younger guys earlier in the season. As soon as we were mathematically eliminated we should have started tanking.

No one likes to hear that but there is NO reason to keep winning games once you know you won't make the playoffs. I can't root against this team but I don't want us to win these next games because it does zero for the team going forward.

[scampbell1975]

Which is why we should have started IRing guys and putting in younger guys earlier in the season. As soon as we were mathematically eliminated we should have started tanking.

No one likes to hear that but there is NO reason to keep winning games once you know you won't make the playoffs. I can't root against this team but I don't want us to win these next games because it does zero for the team going forward.

I can NEVER agree with purposely losing games. It's just not in a competitive man's nature.

[GSF]

The Skins can't afford to trade away draft picks period. The roster is just way to thin.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

The Skins can't afford to trade away draft picks period. The roster is just way to thin.

They certainly CAN if they plan to start building the right way...accepting that they aren't ready to win and being OK with developing the young players that they have. This is about to be the deepest FA class in a very long time (maybe even since FA began in the early 1990s). I believe we can get to between 40-50M under the cap with a few more veteran cuts. You can very easily trade away picks and a body or two to get Luck and surround him with enough talent so that he can begin to safely take his lumps. Then, since you have the biggest piece of the puzzle in-house, you can slowly begin to build your team around him and you're not rushed by any time-tables like you might be with McNabb/Grossman/Beck at QB. If it takes 4 years, so what, you still have a 25-year old QB about to hit his prime and 2 solid drafts to supplement your team (assuming the 2 before that were mostly traded away).

I don't think, if you have ANY shot to trade up to get him, you can pass on a potential Manning or Brady. Look at how much more promising teams like the Rams and even Lions are mostly due to their young, franchise QBs. Bradford has a decent line, an aging but very good RB, and nothing else on offense and St. Louis fans are watching a team that could finish .500 a year after going 1-15 (forget about the playoffs since most people will minimize that due to their division).

Get a QB and alter your plan accordingly once you have him!! I also believe that Shanahan is more likely to stick around and be patient if this approach can be taken. I have to imagine it's more encouraging to rebuild when you have that potential star than if you're building with a journeyman.

Edit: One more note...if we somehow get Luck here in DC, I promise Allen/Snyder that all 4 members of my family will be wearing his jersey by July or August of 2011. That's an adult male, an adult female, and two kids jerseys you can mark down as a "projected sale" for your 2011 targets!

[DarrellsMyHero28]

I can NEVER agree with purposely losing games. It's just not in a competitive man's nature.

Trust me, I'm a very competitive person.

But when you're running a franchise, you have to look at the big picture.

Its not the NBA, where you can only get a CHANCE to get the #1 pick. The worse the record, the better the pick, and if anyone believes that this team has the pieces to compete...I laugh at you.

This team is horrid. Bottom 5 in the NFL, talent wise. We're embarrassingly bad. Winning this year just pushed our rebuilding back even further.

Beating the Cowboys and Eagles once was fun and all, but it really hasn't done anything.

[Boy1Der]

MARK MY WORDS: After the combine everybody is going to be drooling over Jake Locker and he is most likely going to be our pick. Last year everybody had him being the #1 pick if he came out but he decided to stay an extra year and it didn't go as well as planned due to the lack of talent around him.

Locker is mobile big and has a pretty good arm which is what the skins need with our offensive line and Shanahan like to stretch the field. Watch come draft day Locker will be our pick and he will be around when we pick because someone will jump on Newton before we pick or if both Newton and Locker are on the board Shanny will pick Locker.

[mistertim]

MARK MY WORDS: After the combine everybody is going to be drooling over Jake Locker and he is most likely going to be our pick. Last year everybody had him being the #1 pick if he came out but he decided to stay an extra year and it didn't go as well as planned due to the lack of talent around him.

Locker is mobile big and has a pretty good arm which is what the skins need with our offensive line and Shanahan like to stretch the field. Watch come draft day Locker will be our pick and he will be around when we pick because someone will jump on Newton before we pick or if both Newton and Locker are on the board Shanny will pick Locker.

I don't think this is necessarily true. Teams have (generally) gotten smarter over the years about picking a guy high purely based on combines, tons of athletic ability, and "potential". The bottom line is, they will see him at the combine and at his pro day and say "this guy definitely has the tools". Then they will go into the film room and break down his play and see many shortcomings that will likely mark him as a project sort of player. Any time a guy regresses from one year to the next, while in the same system, its a bad sign...especially when his comp % goes down when it wasn't that good before.

Did Locker have elite talent around him? No. But he didn't have the worst players ever like some seem to suggest. Bottom line is that he is inconsistent. Inconsistent in his throws, in his footwork, technique, etc. When I watched him this year he would look great at times then he would suddenly lay an egg after that. I wouldn't mind Locker if Shanny likes him, but NOT with a top 10 pick. You don't draft a QB who will likely be a project in the NFL in the top 10. I'm guessing he falls to the later 1st round.

[Spartacus87]

MARK MY WORDS: After the combine everybody is going to be drooling over Jake Locker and he is most likely going to be our pick. Last year everybody had him being the #1 pick if he came out but he decided to stay an extra year and it didn't go as well as planned due to the lack of talent around him.

Locker is mobile big and has a pretty good arm which is what the skins need with our offensive line and Shanahan like to stretch the field. Watch come draft day Locker will be our pick and he will be around when we pick because someone will jump on Newton before we pick or if both Newton and Locker are on the board Shanny will pick Locker.

Nobody but Todd McShay had Locker as some kind of universal 1st overall pick. The NFL Draft Advisory board gave him a 2nd round grade actually.

---------- Post added December-22nd-2010 at 03:59 AM ----------

I can NEVER agree with purposely losing games. It's just not in a competitive man's nature.

That sounds well and good, until you keep going 7-9, 8-8, 6-10, 8-8, 9-7, over and over and over again.

The people arguing for simply tanking it are correct. I don't believe in fully rebuilding and cutting everybody to start from scratch; teams that do that take years to gain talent back, but when you're in need of a QB and your team sort of sucks as a whole, at some point you just start putting guys on IR, testing out young elements of your team, and figure out how you're going to get your top 1st round QB target in the upcoming draft.

[SkinsFanMania]

Which is why we should have started IRing guys and putting in younger guys earlier in the season. As soon as we were mathematically eliminated we should have started tanking.

No one likes to hear that but there is NO reason to keep winning games once you know you won't make the playoffs. I can't root against this team but I don't want us to win these next games because it does zero for the team going forward.

We were mathematically eliminated after the Tampa Bay game. In came Grossman and out went McNabb.

[dy44]

Which is why we should have started IRing guys and putting in younger guys earlier in the season. As soon as we were mathematically eliminated we should have started tanking.

No one likes to hear that but there is NO reason to keep winning games once you know you won't make the playoffs. I can't root against this team but I don't want us to win these next games because it does zero for the team going forward.

We were eliminated with the loss to Tampa!

[hitmandm]

I said this in another thread, but there is nothing worse than being really bad but going 5-11, 6-10 or 7-9. If you are going to suck, go big. Go 2-14 or 3-13. It is your best chance to grab a franchise QB. There is nothing worse for a franchise than slowly dying with 7-9 or 8-8 records, drafting 10th through 15th and never being bad enough to grab a game changing franchise player.

OMG...someone who pays attention to the NFL

---------- Post added December-22nd-2010 at 12:08 AM ----------

The problem is everyone and their mother knows Andrew Luck will be a franchise QB for the next decade.

No one is going to pass that up.

I think you can buy Carolina out of that pick. They did spend a 2nd on Claussen. If you give them 5 top picks, they might decide it is worth it.

It is hilarious that everyone here says a QB isnt worth it, but then the discussion is that no one will take this "paying too much package" to give up this QB.

---------- Post added December-22nd-2010 at 12:10 AM ----------

You can't predict that we'll be in a position to get a QB in a couple of years.

thats right. The absolute flaw in every argument regarding getting a QB in a couple of years.

[Mursilis]

I said this in another thread, but there is nothing worse than being really bad but going 5-11, 6-10 or 7-9. If you are going to suck, go big. Go 2-14 or 3-13. It is your best chance to grab a franchise QB. There is nothing worse for a franchise than slowly dying with 7-9 or 8-8 records, drafting 10th through 15th and never being bad enough to grab a game changing franchise player.

Your fear here is vastly overstated. It's not like drafting in the top 5 for most of the past 10 years did the Lions any good, and picking late in the first round hasn't hurt teams like the Pats, Steelers, or Colts. There's plenty of quality in every round, if you've got a nice combo platter of luck and good scouting.

---------- Post added December-22nd-2010 at 08:40 AM ----------

I don't really get some people who talk about looking for a gem in later rounds for a QB. It hardly ever happens. Ever. The situation with Brady is a complete anomaly. For any one Brady there are probably hundreds of other QBs taken in mid to late rounds that do absolutely zero. Or, at best, end up as decent backups or passable starters after some time.

Heck, it happened twice with the same team - Cassell was a 7th round pick. They got a 11-5 season out of him, and then traded him for a 2nd!

---------- Post added December-22nd-2010 at 08:52 AM ----------

Personally, I'm going after Luck. Hard.

Multiple 1st rounders, players etc. Do whatever is necessary.

Even the best QB ever still needs help. Look how long it took P. Manning to get a ring. Dan Marino and Jim Kelly never got one. I'm all for getting a franchise QB - I've said repeatedly it's the most important position on the field - but this isn't basketball. An elite QB without talent around him will get you no better than 8 wins. There is such a thing as paying too much for a player, no matter how elite. This team has a LOT of holes, and we can't afford to be trading a bunch of high picks for one single player with so many other needs.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Good post

If Luck is not possible, get Darius in round 1 and Hudson in round 2 to shore up both lines a bit.

Work on fixing the o-line and d-line until the opportunity presents itself. This QB draft to me is Luck or nothing, similar to last year being Bradford or nothing

And yes, I would have also traded quite a bit for Bradford. It looks like those of us who wanted him last offseason are fairly vindicated, even though Trent has been terrific

---------- Post added December-21st-2010 at 10:25 PM ----------

Which is why we should have started IRing guys and putting in younger guys earlier in the season. As soon as we were mathematically eliminated we should have started tanking.

No one likes to hear that but there is NO reason to keep winning games once you know you won't make the playoffs. I can't root against this team but I don't want us to win these next games because it does zero for the team going forward.

Agree, but we were 4-3 at one point

There was still a very good chance at making the playoffs.

A 4-12 team wouldn't get us the top spot

And also, for those not wanting to trade the farm for Luck, this kid is the total package

[YOUTUBE]WQ-a-N9Y5mc[/YOUTUBE]