Redskins get No. 2 pick.....

[Uncle.Ruckus]

The only way that was true is if the Cowboys decided to cut him before the season began. Does that sound likely, or even plausible?

 

[derwood]

I'm with Headbutt. Shanahan and Allen used the uncapped year to take a lot of deadweight off the books. Other teams could and should have done the same. There's no reason for them to be boned by it now.

There's a reason why other teams did not do this.

Yeah, they're cheap. Seems like they're changing the rules in the middle of the game, no?

Nothing to do with money. Cowboys "restructured" Austin's contract by converting over six million dollars of salary into signing bonus. Money is the same but cap hit is different.

Doesn't that guarantee money that would otherwise not have been guaranteed?

Nope. They took the salary for the uncapped year and converted to signing bonus. Money is the same just different accounting to lower long-term cap hit.

 

[Double Down]

Teams were told repeatedly by the NFL they couldn't try to game the uncapped year by reworking deals so that all the money was guaranteed in the uncapped year. The Cowboys and Redskins did it anyway. The union doesn't have any problem with what happened. In fact, they were probably thrilled to see players get guaranteed money. It's the rest of the teams in the NFL that wanted Snyder and Jones punished, because they were working with a competitive advantage the other teams didn't have going forward. Both owners were trying to bail themselves out of cap woes they created.

 

[heyabbott]

Haven't had a chance to read all nine pages, but anyone think that the Colts will rethink the No. 1 pick, realize Luck faced lousy defenses, most Pac-1012 QBs bomb in the NFL, and will draft RG3, leaving Luck for 'Skins?

For the record, B12 QB's haven't exactly lit the world on fire.

I don't understand what this has to do with anything.

Just responding to the assertion that the Colts might pass on Luck for RG3 because Pac12 QBs haven't had much success in the NFL.

It didn't stop the Rams from taking Bradford.

OK? Don't understand what your point is. I'm not saying that RG3 is going to fail because he's from the Big 12. The poster said that Pac 12 QBs fail in the NFL in a general sense (Rodgers and Carson Palmer have been pretty good, though). He used that to say it might be a reason that Indy could pass on Luck for RG3. I was just saying they wouldn't use that logic to take RG3 based on how B12 QBs have produced in the league. Simple.

Best current QBs in the NFL:
Brady Big10
P. Manning SEC
E. Manning SEC
Roethlisberger MAC
Brees Big 10
Rodgers Pac 12
Rivers ACC
Stafford SEC
Romo Ohio Valley
Ryan ACC
Schaub ACC
Newton SEC
Fitzpatrick Ivy
Sanchez Pac 12
Flacco CAA
Palmer Pac12
Vick Big East
Bradford Big 12

Can you draw any conclusion or even inference based on college conference?

 

[Moderator1]

Vick didn't play in the ACC. He was a Big East QB

 

[heyabbott]

Vick didn't play in the ACC. He was a Big East QB

Fixed.

 

[FootballScribe]

Haven't had a chance to read all nine pages, but anyone think that the Colts will rethink the No. 1 pick, realize Luck faced lousy defenses, most Pac-1012 QBs bomb in the NFL, and will draft RG3, leaving Luck for 'Skins?

For the record, B12 QB's haven't exactly lit the world on fire.

I don't understand what this has to do with anything.

Just responding to the assertion that the Colts might pass on Luck for RG3 because Pac12 QBs haven't had much success in the NFL.

It didn't stop the Rams from taking Bradford.

OK? Don't understand what your point is. I'm not saying that RG3 is going to fail because he's from the Big 12. The poster said that Pac 12 QBs fail in the NFL in a general sense (Rodgers and Carson Palmer have been pretty good, though). He used that to say it might be a reason that Indy could pass on Luck for RG3. I was just saying they wouldn't use that logic to take RG3 based on how B12 QBs have produced in the league. Simple.

Best current QBs in the NFL:
Brady Big10
P. Manning SEC
E. Manning SEC
Roethlisberger MAC
Brees Big 10
Rodgers Pac 12
Rivers ACC
Stafford SEC
Romo Ohio Valley
Ryan ACC
Schaub ACC
Newton SEC
Fitzpatrick Ivy
Sanchez Pac 12
Flacco CAA
Palmer Pac12
Vick Big East
Bradford Big 12

Can you draw any conclusion or even inference based on college conference?

I don't even understand what the basis of the conversation is? All I was saying is that teams aren't going to determine whether they choose a QB or not based on his conference affiliation.

And for the record, if you want to put Bradford on the list, you should include another B12 QB in Josh Freeman as well.

 

[Double Down]

Arm strength, accuracy, footwork, the ability to read coverage teams are attempting to play, and how comfortable you are with a Pro Style offense has way more to do with how a quarterback should be evaluated than how good the conference was that he played in. Put Andrew Luck in the SEC and he'd be Eli Manning with more mobility. Put John Parker Wilson in the PAC 12 and he's still going to look like John Parker Wilson. He might throw for more yards and TDs, but he's still not an NFL starter.

 

[heyabbott]

I don't even understand what the basis of the conversation is? All I was saying is that teams aren't going to determine whether they choose a QB or not based on his conference affiliation.

And for the record, if you want to put Bradford on the list, you should include another B12 QB in Josh Freeman as well.

I was attempting to agree with you. If you look at the qb/conference dsitribution, you'd think the ACC was the equal of the Big 10.

QB is so idiosyncratic that the matrix to determine whether a college QB would be an effective pro QB is so diverse that no single factor is determinitive.

Given Romo, Flacco and Fitzgerald, I'd bet there would be several Linsanity stories in the NFL if teams would open their minds a bit more.

 

[Uncle.Ruckus]

I know some people don't like Jay Cutler, but now he can't even beat out Ryan ****ing Fitzpatrick?

 

[FootballScribe]

I don't even understand what the basis of the conversation is? All I was saying is that teams aren't going to determine whether they choose a QB or not based on his conference affiliation.

And for the record, if you want to put Bradford on the list, you should include another B12 QB in Josh Freeman as well.

I was attempting to agree with you. If you look at the qb/conference dsitribution, you'd think the ACC was the equal of the Big 10.

QB is so idiosyncratic that the matrix to determine whether a college QB would be an effective pro QB is so diverse that no single factor is determinitive.

Given Romo, Flacco and Fitzgerald, I'd bet there would be several Linsanity stories in the NFL if teams would open their minds a bit more.

Gotcha. My bad. I agree with your post.

 

[Gehrig]

I was thinking about the possibility of the Redskins signing Wallace or Jackson next season. I'm just curious, will they be able to afford one of them? Don't they have a 18 million penalty next season?

 

[93Devil]

I don't even understand what the basis of the conversation is? All I was saying is that teams aren't going to determine whether they choose a QB or not based on his conference affiliation.

And for the record, if you want to put Bradford on the list, you should include another B12 QB in Josh Freeman as well.

I was attempting to agree with you. If you look at the qb/conference dsitribution, you'd think the ACC was the equal of the Big 10.

QB is so idiosyncratic that the matrix to determine whether a college QB would be an effective pro QB is so diverse that no single factor is determinitive.

Given Romo, Flacco and Fitzgerald, I'd bet there would be several Linsanity stories in the NFL if teams would open their minds a bit more.

You mean tether your franchise to a mediocre QB?

 

[heyabbott]

I don't even understand what the basis of the conversation is? All I was saying is that teams aren't going to determine whether they choose a QB or not based on his conference affiliation.

And for the record, if you want to put Bradford on the list, you should include another B12 QB in Josh Freeman as well.

I was attempting to agree with you. If you look at the qb/conference dsitribution, you'd think the ACC was the equal of the Big 10.

QB is so idiosyncratic that the matrix to determine whether a college QB would be an effective pro QB is so diverse that no single factor is determinitive.

Given Romo, Flacco and Fitzgerald, I'd bet there would be several Linsanity stories in the NFL if teams would open their minds a bit more.

You mean tether your franchise to a mediocre QB?

He may be a mediocre QB, he may better better than average or even a 6-10 QB. He's better than Grossman, he's as much of a gamble and cheaper than Matt Flynn and Orton. That was the choice the Redskins faced. The only way it's a disaster is if the Redskins finish as one of the 5 worst teams in each of the next 2 years. Giving up 2 top 5 picks is too great a price.

 

[wicked]

Teams were told repeatedly by the NFL they couldn't try to game the uncapped year by reworking deals so that all the money was guaranteed in the uncapped year. The Cowboys and Redskins did it anyway.

I don't remember hearing a peep about this at the time. Why wouldn't the NFL have wanted this leaked back then?