Good Question from a radio show!

[Stymietee]

Should make for some interesting commentaries from this groups members.
How would your opinions and grades differ if Bruce Allen or anyone besides SM (currently in the organization) had made the same moves/selections?

 

[Sharkinva]

If any one not names Scot McCloughan had made these exact same picks, the fan base and the world at large would be clowning like Jerry at this time.

 

[gkekoa]

Should make for some interesting commentaries from this groups members.
How would your opinions and grades differ if Bruce Allen or anyone besides SM (currently in the organization) had made the same moves/selections?

Considering I am a well known BVA guy, I would have been fine because I have noted our top two WRs will be FAs next season and we will likely only pay DJ. So taking Doctson in round 1 made sense.

I am a trenches guy but look at how this draft unfolded. It isn't like the DTs went immediately after our pick. Vernon Butler didn't go until 31 and he was the only first rounder I really liked but I liked him at the top of round 2 because of competition. I didn't like Kenny Clark and Nkemdiche was an underachiever with issues. After that, the next 3-4 DE to come off was Jones six picks into the second.

I would have had a harder time with Cravens because I would question our ability to use him. Also, since the draft, I have heard how we will use him and like it. I would have been begging for Bullard in the second but when you see him going nine in the third, I can't be upset.

I would have loved the third round pick in Fuller because I am all about deals.

I probably would have been screaming about passing on Billings because I didn't know who the hell Ioanissis is. Since passing on Billings, I have looked a little closer and see a guy on the ground that gets moved to easily.

I wouldn't have minded Sudfield because I don't care now. He is a project just like all the other QBs here.

Daniels would have been the same for me.

I loved the Keith Marshall pick and had him in several mocks I did. He is my kind of seventh. A guy with incredible upside that was highly thought of but got injured. If you are lucky, he returns to form. If he is like most 7th rounders, he doesn't make the team. But you can't pass on the upside.

 

[redskinsfan]

I (and I'm assuming just about everyone here) doesn't know a whole lot about any drafted player, especially those later on in the draft. In order to assess how your GM / Front Office does in the draft, it's often viewed through the prism of their pedigree or reputation. I've got no problem, at least right now, in approving the picks Scot's made given his track record. On the other hand, I can see how questioning someone who doesn't have an equivalent draft history would be warranted. Unless the picks being made are completely absurd, you've got to default to this construct when assessing draft picks made by a GM.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

If any one not names Scot McCloughan had made these exact same picks, the fan base and the world at large would be clowning like Jerry at this time.

That all depends on the name/reputation of the other GM. If it was Vinny or similar - sure. If it was someone w/ a solid reputation from being with say the Pats or Packers I would feel the same way especially given the fact that this person had a solid draft the year before.

One thing that you have to remember is that at least this regime is retaining (& actually acquiring additional) draft picks unlike the previous FOs. This is huge over time. It is a pretty good bet that not all of these picks will contribute over the long term, but several will & should make this team solid along with the contributions from other drafts.

You almost seem to have a distaste for SM - let it go. He is not perfect and will make mistakes but honestly who could they have hired that would do a better job? IMO - he is rt on schedule & should make this team a powerhouse w/i the next few years.

 

[ehb5]

I would've still loved the doctson pick, probably questioned Cravens a bit more, been pretty happy with fuller still, questioned ioaniddis much more, still disliked sudfield, and still liked Marshall. I probably would've been more upset about not getting much DL help and specifically Billings.

Overall I have more faith that it'll work because of SM but if he had taken Derrick Henry at 21 I would've freaked out. I'm not against criticizing him if I think he screwed up.

 

[ehb5]

If any one not names Scot McCloughan had made these exact same picks, the fan base and the world at large would be clowning like Jerry at this time.

This seems to imply they were bad picks then. Or are you saying we are just blindly following him? Either way doctson is highly regarded and I think would've been a well liked pick by both us and the media.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

I would've still loved the doctson pick, probably questioned Cravens a bit more, been pretty happy with fuller still, questioned ioaniddis much more, still disliked sudfield, and still liked Marshall. I probably would've been more upset about not getting much DL help and specifically Billings.

Overall I have more faith that it'll work because of SM but if he had taken Derrick Henry at 21 I would've freaked out. I'm not against criticizing him if I think he screwed up.

No problem at all in criticizing any of the moves. On the other hand there is also no problem in anyone stating that they have faith in the GM & value his opinion over those of random fans. Time will tell on all of this.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

This seems to imply they were bad picks then. Or are you saying we are just blindly following him? Either way doctson is highly regarded and I think would've been a well liked pick by both us and the media.

I don't think that the media is blinding following SM & just about all of them gave the Redskins high marks for the draft (although again these marks mean nothing at this time).

 

[SoCalWizFan]

BTW - for fans that are overly harsh in criticizing picks before they even take the field just remember the Texans fans from the 2011 draft who booed the selection of JJ Watt!

 

[redskinsfan]

BTW - for fans that are overly harsh in criticizing picks before they even take the field just remember the Texans fans from the 2011 draft who booed the selection of JJ Watt!

And to think that we had the 10th overall pick that year, which was the pick right before the Texans 11th overall pick and the one they used to take Watt.

 

[Stymietee]

I've got a feeling that there would be a lot of consternation and second guessing based on the amount there was following SM's picks. I also believe that Scot is still in a sort of honeymoon phase, because of the way things were prior to his arrival and the benefit of doubt accorded him because of the daunting task of rebuilding this team and changing the trajectory of the organization. Reading some of the posts here since his arrival there are, however, some cracks beginning to show in this goodwill phase.(ask if you don't know) Had Bruce Allen or anyone not named Scot Mac made these same moves, that same goodwill would not have been there to cushion the blowback. I've gotta admit, 9-7 and a division title didn't hurt either!!

 

[Sharkinva]

This seems to imply they were bad picks then. Or are you saying we are just blindly following him? Either way doctson is highly regarded and I think would've been a well liked pick by both us and the media.

I was more leaning towards the blindly following aspect. I agree the Doctson pick was a good pick. But face it, had Bruce made the exact same pick and not gotten a D-lineman until the 5th round, he would be getting crucified both here and in the media. Scot gets alot of leeway because of who he is and what he has done at other stops. For that matter, the Norman signing would have started chants of same old Redskins alot more than it did.

 

[redskinsfan]

I was more leaning towards the blindly following aspect. I agree the Doctson pick was a good pick. But face it, had Bruce made the exact same pick and not gotten a D-lineman until the 5th round, he would be getting crucified both here and in the media. Scot gets alot of leeway because of who he is and what he has done at other stops. For that matter, the Norman signing would have started chants of same old Redskins alot more than it did.

And you don't agree with the way that works? If Warren Buffett gives you investment advice on Stock X, wouldn't you trust that more than one of us board members if we gave you the same advice?

 

[ehb5]

I was more leaning towards the blindly following aspect. I agree the Doctson pick was a good pick. But face it, had Bruce made the exact same pick and not gotten a D-lineman until the 5th round, he would be getting crucified both here and in the media. Scot gets alot of leeway because of who he is and what he has done at other stops. For that matter, the Norman signing would have started chants of same old Redskins alot more than it did.

I think part of it is that with Scot, we have faith that he is picking BPA and will find us good players so we give him a little more leeway with not filling a need like DL. If it was Bruce though, I think we'd all just assume he was randomly picking people off of god knows what. There is no, "well he didnt get a DL but he got a football player". So I guess Im agreeing with you that Scot gets more of a pass from us - but I think he deserves it. And I still think if any of the picks were real bad we (or at least some of us) wouldnt have a problem criticizing it. There are a lot of players he couldve taken at 21 that I would be either upset about or just much less happy about then Doctson.

 

[Sharkinva]

Guys, Like I said... Im just seeing the blind faith aspect of this. Any one that says we didnt need a serious talent upgrade on the D-line is deluding themselves. I have never said Scot made BAD picks in this draft. And in fact Besides the QB who I am iffy on, I think he made solid picks based on what was on the board. But I also think Long term need kind of played a factor in best player available at 21, plus a healthy bit of a gamble that there would be a D-lineman worthy of the pick in round two.

I agree he gets a bit more leeway because of his track record. But you got to admit, if his name were other than Scot... the opinion would be really different.

 

[redskinsfan]

Guys, Like I said... Im just seeing the blind faith aspect of this. Any one that says we didnt need a serious talent upgrade on the D-line is deluding themselves. I have never said Scot made BAD picks in this draft. And in fact Besides the QB who I am iffy on, I think he made solid picks based on what was on the board. But I also think Long term need kind of played a factor in best player available at 21, plus a healthy bit of a gamble that there would be a D-lineman worthy of the pick in round two.

I agree he gets a bit more leeway because of his track record. But you got to admit, if his name were other than Scot... the opinion would be really different.

Then who would you have picked? Jarran Reed? A'Shawn Robionson? Prior to the draft, that would've been my response. But can you, I or anyone else here say that any of us has done the required amount of research on these draft prospects and, more importantly, possessed the expertise in analyzing that research like Scot can? According to him, those guys weren't BPAs. If so, I'm comfortable with that.

And my view with Scot isn't blind faith, it's deference. Blind faith is something Scientologists or the James Jones crew puts into their leadership. Deference is simply reliance on someone who's an expert on a particular matter, with the provision that such deference won't apply in cases of clear eff ups (e.g., trading up in the first round for a long snapper).

 

[Sportster 72]

I agree Shark, if it was Vinny I would be wondering a lot more. Sorry, I believe you get the best 53 and work with it. I said during the draft, it isn't Sept. or week 1 yet. You haven't let this play out yet.