scenarios for a cousins trade

[deanpet21]

Shark you don't know if the Skins were even high on Tannenhill. Plus we gave them two first rounders and a 2nd. You don't count the swap b/c it was the original pick. So far the players they have gotten from the trade are J. Jenkins and A. Ogletree plus a 1st round guy in 2014. The Dolphins have nothing to do with this trade. You evaluate this trade between the Rams and Redskins. Who has the brighter future in the next 5-7 years.

 

[Sharkinva]

Shark you don't know if the Skins were even high on Tannenhill. Plus we gave them two first rounders and a 2nd. You don't count the swap b/c it was the original pick. So far the players they have gotten from the trade are J. Jenkins and A. Ogletree plus a 1st round guy in 2014. The Dolphins have nothing to do with this trade. You evaluate this trade between the Rams and Redskins. Who has the brighter future in the next 5-7 years.

Dean, How do you not count the pick we actually used to get him?? We gave up three extra picks to get him. But over all it cost us FOUR picks for this guy. And the Rams mean nothing here because the true comparison is, what we could have done had we NOT made the trade. Just because they were high on griffin doesnt make it the right move. Right now, of the QBs in his draft class RG3 is being out played by Luck, Wilson and to a degree Tannehill as he has managed to do enough to keep his defense OUT of bad situations. Add in that none of these guys cost their team four high draft picks. We would be no worse off with Tannehill this season than we are with RG3. And i honestly am starting to think we would actually be better off. Long term I think RGMe is looking like another mistake.

 

[Caliskinsfan]

Cali, I think you misunderstand. I didnt expect multiple Super Bowl contentions within his rookie contract. But I did and still do expect atleast ONE serious Super Bowl push before his rookie contract is over. If not, then you do seriously have to question the move in light of what we gave up to get him. I would give him the injury excuse, except I think he is alot more responsible for the injury than many want to let on. And I dont discount poor play in other areas of the team, but its a bitch move for him to constantly deflect blame for his own weaknesses. Just dont like the persona he is putting off. When they win he says we did good, but if they lose its well this was wrong and that was wrong. Followed by a correction a few days later. So considering what we gave up for him, and what we are getting... I am seriously reconsidering his true value since it appears he may never be more than an option QB. And while he is great at that when healthy, IM starting to think we might have gotten snookered.

I DID misunderstand what you were saying. And if we don't see a big improvement in year 3, I will wholeheartedly AGREE with all the points you've stated above, except the injury one. That gives him a little more wiggle room in terms of time for me. I actually agree with the persona issue right now, though I'm currently chalking it up to maturity. He doesn't get that benefit of the doubt next year. I'm truly disappointed in his lack of humility. Maybe its self-confidence, but its coming across as arrogance, at times, and that is soooooo not appropriate for a 2nd year player. He needs to just play. Right now, I still don't believe he's an arrogant guy, just a young, too candid one. That will change, if he continues in this media trajectory.

However I do agree that at least ONE serious SB push, within the framework of his rookie contract was not an unreasonable expectation, given the value of the draft picks we gave up to get him.

 

[deanpet21]

B/c we didn't GIVE UP our own 1st round pick to draft him. We used our original pick to draft him in a swap with the Rams. We GAVE UP two 1st and a 2nd. Tannehill is not outplaying RG3. You are crazy too think so . RG3 had a better 2012. Yes RG3 has struggled in 2013 but is still playing better than Tannehill. Tannehill was given one the highest paid WR in FA history and has done nothing with him. Too want Tannehill over RG3 is absolute nuts. You are over reacting Shark

I do agree with you that Luck and Wilson are outplaying RG3 to this point in there careers. Yes the Rams do mean something in this trade b/c I think the Rams are a better team with RG3 than Bradford who is always hurt. The Rams would of had a better future with RG3. They are going nowhere with Bradford.

 

[Sharkinva]

B/c we didn't GIVE UP our own 1st round pick to draft him. We used our original pick to draft him in a swap with the Rams. We GAVE UP two 1st and a 2nd. Tannehill is not outplaying RG3. You are crazy too think so . RG3 had a better 2012. Yes RG3 has struggled in 2013 but is still playing better than Tannehill. Tannehill was given one the highest paid WR in FA history and has done nothing with him. Too want Tannehill over RG3 is absolute nuts. You are over reacting Shark

I do agree with you that Luck and Wilson are outplaying RG3 to this point in there careers. Yes the Rams do mean something in this trade b/c I think the Rams are a better team with RG3 than Bradford who is always hurt. The Rams would of had a better future with RG3. They are going nowhere with Bradford.

Dean... we used the 2nd pick in 2012, plus our 2nd rounder. Throw in the 1st in 2013 and the 1st in 2014 and thats four picks.

What you are saying is like if I asked you for a dollar bill in exchange for 4 quarters, then I took an additional $3.75 out of my pocket and used the entire $4.75 to buy a sub, I only really spent $3.75 because a swapped a dollor for change with you first. RGMe cost us FOUR draft picks no matter how you slice it. And I think as i did when we first made the trade, we would be no worse off with Tanehill than we are right now with The Me. And honestly I think we would be better off because we could have addressed actual needs with those picks.

 

[gkekoa]

You have to consider the following when looking at the RG3 trade:
1) Ryan Tannehill. I'd much rather have RG3 than Tannehill, even this season. You can't look at the record...you can only look at the QB.

2) The 2nd in 2012 (Janoris Jenkins), the 1st in 2013 (Desmond Trufant), and the 1st in 2014 (which could very well have been a QB if we drafted Tannehill).



On another note, you can claim that Luck and Wilson are better at this point; however, their situations are far different. Last season, Luck was asked to do everything in that system. This year he has been asked to do far less. I do think Luck has a better team surrounding him but I have seen him miss a ton of throws this season...that's why he's got the same completion percentage as RG3.
Wilson has by far the best team surrounding him, especially on defense. This means much less is asked of him. He continually sees a soft secondary because of the effectiveness of their running game. The difference in their running game and ours (which is ultra effective) is our running game goes away when we are getting killed (SEA doesn't get killed because of their defense).
I'd take RG3 on this team over Wilson today. I'd take Luck over both because of my injury concerns for RG3.

 

[Sharkinva]

You have to consider the following when looking at the RG3 trade:
1) Ryan Tannehill. I'd much rather have RG3 than Tannehill, even this season. You can't look at the record...you can only look at the QB.

2) The 2nd in 2012 (Janoris Jenkins), the 1st in 2013 (Desmond Trufant), and the 1st in 2014 (which could very well have been a QB if we drafted Tannehill).



On another note, you can claim that Luck and Wilson are better at this point; however, their situations are far different. Last season, Luck was asked to do everything in that system. This year he has been asked to do far less. I do think Luck has a better team surrounding him but I have seen him miss a ton of throws this season...that's why he's got the same completion percentage as RG3.
Wilson has by far the best team surrounding him, especially on defense. This means much less is asked of him. He continually sees a soft secondary because of the effectiveness of their running game. The difference in their running game and ours (which is ultra effective) is our running game goes away when we are getting killed (SEA doesn't get killed because of their defense).
I'd take RG3 on this team over Wilson today. I'd take Luck over both because of my injury concerns for RG3.

OK assuming your second choice was correct... How in the hell can you say we wouldnt be in a better position even assuming that we would be going after a QB?? We would have two good YOUNG CBs in your worst case scenario here. And I honestly dont think we would be looking for a Qb right now. Or do you think the Dolphins are about to give up on Tanehill?? Or more to the point, wouldnt you rather be in the position to give up on a player if he wasnt working out?? As it stands right now, we are no better off than Dallas at the QB spot. They are stuck with tony for cap reasons. RGMe could suck ass next year and we are stuck with him based on how much we gave up to get him.

 

[deanpet21]

When people compare the skins/ Rams rg3 trade its this:

Skins: rg3

rams: Jenkins, Ogletree, and 2014 first round pick originally owned by the Skins

Its 3 players for 1 deal. (Broakers DT LSU) who was drafted in the 1st round in 2012 has nothing to do with this trade. The Skins sacrificed three future players to get RG3. The rams said to the Skins we will give you RG3 but we want 3 future extra players in return(2nd round, and two 1st)

We overpaid with a 1st round pick in 2014 b/c Cle was rumored to give them a huge deal. We beat Cle to the punch and made the deal with the 2014 1st round pick being the deciding factor. That 2014 1st round pick was supposed to be a late one b/c most people had us making the playoffs this year.

The bottom line here is winning. The Redskins won in 2012 the Rams didn't. Neither team is going to the playoffs this year.

 

[Sharkinva]

Dean... again its flawed logic. We got one pick, they got four. No matter how you try and spin it, we gave up four picks for him period. As bad as you claim the Rams are in spite of the trade... they are still better than us where it counts. Wins and losses. Defensively they are lights out better than us and this is a direct result of the trade. IM seriously starting to think we outfoxed ourselves with this move.

 

[Manster7588]

When people compare the skins/ Rams rg3 trade its this:

Skins: rg3

rams: Jenkins, Ogletree, and 2014 first round pick originally owned by the Skins

Its 3 players for 1 deal. (Broakers DT LSU) who was drafted in the 1st round in 2012 has nothing to do with this trade. The Skins sacrificed three future players to get RG3. The rams said to the Skins we will give you RG3 but we want 3 future extra players in return(2nd round, and two 1st)

We overpaid with a 1st round pick in 2014 b/c Cle was rumored to give them a huge deal. We beat Cle to the punch and made the deal with the 2014 1st round pick being the deciding factor. That 2014 1st round pick was supposed to be a late one b/c most people had us making the playoffs this year.

The bottom line here is winning. The Redskins won in 2012 the Rams didn't. Neither team is going to the playoffs this year.

The Skins sent the 2012 #6 pick, two additional 1st rd picks and a future 2nd. That = 4 picks. Granted they got the #2 pick back so in essence RG3 did cost 4 picks but only 3 additional picks. I can see both Dean and Shark being right in this argument. All depends on how you look at it. 4 picks total or 3 additional picks.

 

[gkekoa]

OK assuming your second choice was correct... How in the hell can you say we wouldnt be in a better position even assuming that we would be going after a QB?? We would have two good YOUNG CBs in your worst case scenario here. And I honestly dont think we would be looking for a Qb right now. Or do you think the Dolphins are about to give up on Tanehill?? Or more to the point, wouldnt you rather be in the position to give up on a player if he wasnt working out?? As it stands right now, we are no better off than Dallas at the QB spot. They are stuck with tony for cap reasons. RGMe could suck ass next year and we are stuck with him based on how much we gave up to get him.

Jenkins was the second rounder used that we traded. How are Jenkins and Trufant doing in comparison to Amerson? I think Amerson is playing well. I know that the Rams and the Falcons are being torched through the air as well.

I think Shanahan may be getting the boot is we had drafted Tannehill. Then we would be getting a new coach that is possibly wanting his own QB with the high pick this season. We may be drafting even higher if we had Tannehill.

If RG3 sucks next season, why are we stuck with him?

 

[deanpet21]

Shark if comes down to wins and losses we already won the trade. We had a division championship last year and this year is not over yet. We could have more wins than the Rams this year. Very possible. I cant believe you think the Rams have a better future than the Skins in that NFC West which is a whole lot better than the NFC East.

We did what we had to do to get a franchise QB. You cant fault the Redskins for doing this. This year has been disappointing but you are just losing control.

 

[skinsdad62]

guys you are wasting your time with shark . let it go . i cant see why tannehill is any better then RG3 and again i bet 3/4's of the NFL would love to have RG3

shark is a doom and gloomer and his expectations are just threw the roof

he argues that the o/line is trash and now he thinks RG3 is a bust

you arent winning this with him you will just go round and round with him and end up at the same place you started

 

[SteelersPride]

two lombardis or hes a bust .........come on

 

[gkekoa]

The cost of RG3 was 3 first rounders and one second rounder.

The cost of the trade was 2 first rounders and one second rounder.

It's all semantics.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

The Skins sent the 2012 #6 pick, two additional 1st rd picks and a future 2nd. That = 4 picks. Granted they got the #2 pick back so in essence RG3 did cost 4 picks but only 3 additional picks. I can see both Dean and Shark being right in this argument. All depends on how you look at it. 4 picks total or 3 additional picks.

I'm not seeing the logic in 4 picks.

WAS moved from the 6th spot to the 2nd spot...it cost them 3 picks to move up.

 

[j_y19]

I'm not seeing the logic in 4 picks.

WAS moved from the 6th spot to the 2nd spot...it cost them 3 picks to move up.

the logic is we used 4 picks to take RG3. 3 1sts and a 2nd.

 

[Sleepy T]

I'm not seeing the logic in 4 picks.

WAS moved from the 6th spot to the 2nd spot...it cost them 3 picks to move up.

I'm with you. The 1st that we gave up and the 1st that received in the '12 draft negates one another.

 

[j_y19]

So shark's point, which is valid, is that we could have had 4 starters in lieu of RG3. The 3 firsts you would expect to be PB caliber starters. But we would also have Cousins as our QB. Remember, Shanahan said that he thought Cousins was the 3rd best QB in that draft.

Frankly, this is an argument in futility. It makes no difference. We have RG3. He either leads us to a SB or it was a bad trade. I do agree with that sentiment. I just don't think that he has to do it in the first 3 years he is in the league. But by the end of his rookie contract, I do expect that we should be making a SB run.

 

[deanpet21]

If Shany thought Cousins was the 3rd best qb in the draft why on earth would he take tanneyhill at #6 overall. Think about that Shark. When you evaluate a trade you never count the swap.