NFL/Draft and Washington's Big RG3 Deal

[-bdbd]

Probably about time to get a thread going about the April NFL draft coming up.

And what a way to kick it off but with the big Redskins-Rams news out tonight that the two teams have struck a deal over the second pick in this year's NFL draft. The 'skins, long in need of a franchise-level QB (for at least a decade or so), are sending this year's #1 (6th overall), their #2 this year (about 36th overall), plus their #1's in 2013 and 2014, in return for the Rams' #1 pick (#2 overall) in this year's draft.

The expectation is that the Redskins will use the pick to select whichever top QB the (#1 overall) Colts don't pick. In other words, after the Colts likely take Stanford's Luck, the Redskins expect to pick Robert Griffin III out of Baylor. Of course RG3 won the Heisman this year, and set some impressive records at the recent NFL combine for his physical abilities, such as the top QB speed ever in the 40-yard dash (WR type speeds).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/post/washington-redskins-acquire-no-2-pick-in-nfl-draft-in-trade-with-st-louis-rams/2012/03/09/gIQAwy1Q2R_blog.html

What do you think? Did they give the Rams too much? If I'm a Rams fan, with holes everywhere, I'd have to be very happy, as they already have a young franchise QB... Supposedly the Clev. Browns were ready to offer something very similar to move up from 4th to 2nd themselves. :confused:

As a 'skins season ticket holder I am excited about this. It makes next year suddenly much more interesting, and the fact that the Browns were offering something very similar argues for this not being an unreasonable price. BUT, they do still have some real holes to fill in the O-line and at WR. Of course, they are well under the cap, and can therefore pick up some quality hole-fillers too... Time will tell. :rolleyes:

[BD80]

Probably about time to get a thread going about the April NFL draft coming up.

And what a way to kick it off but with the big Redskins-Rams news out tonight that the two teams have struck a deal over the second pick in this year's NFL draft. The 'skins, long in need of a franchise-level QB (for at least a decade or so), are sending this year's #1 (6th overall), their #2 this year (about 36th overall), plus their #1's in 2013 and 2014, in return for the Rams' #1 pick (#2 overall) in this year's draft.

The expectation is that the Redskins will use the pick to select whichever top QB the (#1 overall) Colts don't pick. In other words, after the Colts likely take Stanford's Luck, the Redskins expect to pick Robert Griffin III out of Baylor. Of course RG3 won the Heisman this year, and set some impressive records at the recent NFL combine for his physical abilities, such as the top QB speed ever in the 40-yard dash (WR type speeds).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/post/washington-redskins-acquire-no-2-pick-in-nfl-draft-in-trade-with-st-louis-rams/2012/03/09/gIQAwy1Q2R_blog.html

What do you think? Did they give the Rams too much? If I'm a Rams fan, with holes everywhere, I'd have to be very happy, as they already have a young franchise QB... Supposedly the Clev. Browns were ready to offer something very similar to move up from 4th to 2nd themselves. :confused:

As a 'skins season ticket holder I am excited about this. It makes next year suddenly much more interesting, and the fact that the Browns were offering something very similar argues for this not being an unreasonable price. BUT, they do still have some real holes to fill in the O-line and at WR. Of course, they are well under the cap, and can therefore pick up some quality hole-fillers too... Time will tell. :rolleyes:

Big risk for Skins. I can't see a big improvement with a rookie QB, so those picks in 2013 & 2014 will be high picks. Even under the cap, tough to rebuild without those picks.

Great deal for the Rams. #6 and 2 high 2nd rounders will help now, high #1s plus their own in next 2 years, wow.

[weezie]

Big risk for RG3, too. Hope the skins can protect him and help him avoid injuries. Those big fellas up front should be made very aware of their roles.

Would be sad to see him languish in FedEx and then go somewhere else and have the success he seems destined to.

[JNort]

Poor Skins got ripped off in this trade..... They did this to get RGIII and I swear he is gonna be a bust

[PumpkinFunk]

As a Redskins fan, I'm really torn about this trade. On the one hand, we had a huge hole at QB, and we needed to stop taking short-term solutions. On the other hand, I'm worried about trading two future 1st rounders and this year's 2nd rounder. Unless we can bring in some big free agent help at all of our other holes (CB, OL, WR, etc) we're a bad-to-middling team in a good division in the no-man's land of the NFL for the next few years to come. But, this will get the fans in the seats, that's for sure. And that matters a lot to Daniel Snyder.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

I don't disagree with the Skins making a big move to acquire a player who many consider to be a franchise QB. However, I feel like they could have give up a bit less - perhaps have the 2nd round pick be a 3 or a 4, or have one of the 1s be a 2 or a 3. That would allow them to have more options to surround RG3 with talent. However, keep in mind that top draft picks have slotted salaries that are much, much lower than in the past, so RG3 will be less of a drag on the salary cap, giving the Skins more opportunity to pick up some decent free agents. St. Louis played this really well, and should be an up-and-coming team if they use the picks wisely and have some patience.

[sagegrouse]

Big risk for RG3, too. Hope the skins can protect him and help him avoid injuries. Those big fellas up front should be made very aware of their roles.

Would be sad to see him languish in FedEx and then go somewhere else and have the success he seems destined to.


Poor Skins got ripped off in this trade..... They did this to get RGIII and I swear he is gonna be a bust


As a Redskins fan, I'm really torn about this trade. On the one hand, we had a huge hole at QB, and we needed to stop taking short-term solutions. On the other hand, I'm worried about trading two future 1st rounders and this year's 2nd rounder. Unless we can bring in some big free agent help at all of our other holes (CB, OL, WR, etc) we're a bad-to-middling team in a good division in the no-man's land of the NFL for the next few years to come. But, this will get the fans in the seats, that's for sure. And that matters a lot to Daniel Snyder.

I assume that the St. Louis Rams ran an auction -- may have even used an investment banker -- to get the best deal. The Skins' winning offer may have only been by a nose.

sagegrouse

[snowdenscold]

I assume that the St. Louis Rams ran an auction -- may have even used an investment banker -- to get the best deal. The Skins' winning offer may have only been by a nose.

sagegrouse

I had heard reports that Cleveland was offering something similar, so Washington may not have had much room to negotiate. Which is too bad for me, a Redskins fan.

[throatybeard]

As a resident of the actual City of Saint Louis, not some lily White suburb, Saint Louis, y'all...

...I find it hilarious that the worst-run NFL franchise of the last eight or so years managed to fleece another franchise this badly. Griffin better be a HOF-caliber quarterback.

Of course, they do have a new GM...

[bjornolf]

I think this was a good trade. According to reports this morning, the Rams GM said "the deal will be done Thursday, so give me your best offer and I will take the best one.". Cleveland offered three 1s, Washington offered three 1s, plus the 2. There was no bidding or playing off. The GM took the better offer.

Whether or not this was a good trade, I think it was a NECESSARY trade. The Skins haven't had a franchise QB since Joey T, and haven't had a truly great QB since Sonny. Everything I've seen of this kid says he's fast and agile (to avoid that rush), but unlike Vick in the old days, he avoids to open up receivers, not just to run. He's also very smart (3.76 in PolySci at Baylor and one year into a Masters), blowing away coaches in his chalkboard work and defensive analysis. He may be a bust, but he's the surest thing you can hope for in the draft. And everyone I've heard says he's head and shoulders above anyone in this draft not named Luck.

The Skins had to take a chance on a QB this year or next. If they'd improved everywhere else this year and pulled off a 7 or 8 win season next year, how much would it have cost them to move up to number 1 or 2 next year to get Barkeley? This way, the team can continue to improve, and RG3 will have a year under his belt. Another benefit to this move is that there's a very good free agent receiver class out there this year, and with $50M of cap space and RG3 coming and the new indoor practice facility, suddenly Washington is a MUCH more attractive destination for them. Remember, this team actually has a solid set of receivers. What they lack is a true number one. If they get a true number one target, they'll have a VERY strong receiving core.

We'll see if this was a good trade or not in the next three years. If RG3 is a bust, then it was a bad trade if we'd given a 7th round pick and wasted a first rounder on him. If he's the franchise QB they need and is around for the next 15 years and makes the Skins competitive in the NFC, then this trade was cheap. Somewhere in between, we'll see.

So, was it a good trade? I don't know yet. Was it a necessary trade? Absolutely.

[rasputin]

As a resident of the actual City of Saint Louis, not some lily White suburb, Saint Louis, y'all...

...I find it hilarious that the worst-run NFL franchise of the last eight or so years managed to fleece another franchise this badly. Griffin better be a HOF-caliber quarterback.

Of course, they do have a new GM...

Absent the new GM, my reaction would have been, all this means is that the Rams will have more draft picks to squander. I hope they can reverse that trend. Other than Sam the Ram and MLB Laurinitis, the performance hasn't been worthy of the lofty draft spots, and even Laurinitis was a second-rounder.

[Duvall]

As a resident of the actual City of Saint Louis, not some lily White suburb, Saint Louis, y'all...

...I find it hilarious that the worst-run NFL franchise of the last eight or so years managed to fleece another franchise this badly. Griffin better be a HOF-caliber quarterback.

Of course, they do have a new GM...

Will the Rams use one of those picks to take a good quarterback?

[bjornolf]

Will the Rams use one of those picks to take a good quarterback?

The Rams are sticking with Bradford and trying to build around him. They're convinced that he IS a good quarterback. Otherwise, this trade doesn't happen.

[Blue in the Face]

However, keep in mind that top draft picks have slotted salaries that are much, much lower than in the past, so RG3 will be less of a drag on the salary cap, giving the Skins more opportunity to pick up some decent free agents.
Not to worry, the Skins found a way to drag down the salary cap (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7677375/sources-dallas-cowboys-washington-redskins-lose-millions-cap-space).


The NFL is taking away millions of dollars of salary-cap space belonging to the Dallas Cowboys and Washington Redskins for front-loading contracts during the uncapped 2010 season, according to league sources. The salary cap is projected to be $120.6 million in 2012, but the Cowboys will lose $10 million, while the Redskins will be docked $36 million in cap space, sources said.

They can split up the cap reductions over this year and next, however they want, and the rest of the leage (except for the Saints and Raiders for some reason) get the extra cap space, about $1.6MM per team.

[bjornolf]

Not to worry, the Skins found a way to drag down the salary cap (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7677375/sources-dallas-cowboys-washington-redskins-lose-millions-cap-space).



They can split up the cap reductions over this year and next, however they want, and the rest of the leage (except for the Saints and Raiders for some reason) get the extra cap space, about $1.6MM per team.

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid, especially since they've admitted it's not a violation. The second I heard the season would be uncapped, I said "any smart team will front load contracts." So they're being penalized for being smart? If you're willing to take the gamble that a player won't hold out or get injured, then you should be able to reap the reward if it works out. You're taking a risk by doing, so why shouldn't you be able to do it? It only seems smart to me. Heck, the Redskins have been doing that in CAPPED years since the salary cap started. It's not like they did anything they hadn't done before.

[mkirsh]

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid, especially since they've admitted it's not a violation. The second I heard the season would be uncapped, I said "any smart team will front load contracts." So they're being penalized for being smart? If you're willing to take the gamble that a player won't hold out or get injured, then you should be able to reap the reward if it works out. You're taking a risk by doing, so why shouldn't you be able to do it? It only seems smart to me. Heck, the Redskins have been doing that in CAPPED years since the salary cap started. It's not like they did anything they hadn't done before.

According to this, the teams had been warned not to do this:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/17751262/report-nfl-takes-cap-space-from-cowboys-redskins-for-front-loading-deals

Best part is that this results from the Haynesworth deal - the gift that keeps on giving. Skins were in a very good position headed into Free Agency, and will not have to scramble just to fill out the roster.

[Duvall]

The Rams are sticking with Bradford and trying to build around him. They're convinced that he IS a good quarterback.

Oh, sure. But should they be?

[JNort]

Oh, sure. But should they be?

He is a better option than RGIII at least.

[Duvall]

He is a better option than RGIII at least.

Why?

[BD80]

Why?

Accuracy. RGIII might be able to run really fast downfield and hand it to a receiver, but Bradford can throw it even faster than RGIII can run. Bradford is far more accurate of a passer, and IMO, the better QB to build a franchise around. Give Bradford protection and some weapons, he'll produce. RGIII may not need the same level of protection or support, but he won't be great because his relative lack of accuracy will limit possessions and big plays.

[Duvall]

Bradford is far more accurate of a passer, and IMO, the better QB to build a franchise around.

What are you basing that on?

Bradford completed 67.9% of his passes in his last full college season (http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/sam-bradford-1.html), at a clip of 9.8 yards per attempt, which is really good.

Griffin completed 72.4% of his passes last season (http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/robert-griffin-iii-1.html) at a clip of 10.7 yards per attempt.

[bjornolf]

Accuracy. RGIII might be able to run really fast downfield and hand it to a receiver, but Bradford can throw it even faster than RGIII can run. Bradford is far more accurate of a passer, and IMO, the better QB to build a franchise around. Give Bradford protection and some weapons, he'll produce. RGIII may not need the same level of protection or support, but he won't be great because his relative lack of accuracy will limit possessions and big plays.

I have yet to see anything negative about his accuracy. I watched him a few times at Baylor and I never saw anything in his accuracy that concerned me. Luckily, accuracy is something that can be improved.

[A-Tex Devil]

Accuracy. RGIII might be able to run really fast downfield and hand it to a receiver, but Bradford can throw it even faster than RGIII can run. Bradford is far more accurate of a passer, and IMO, the better QB to build a franchise around. Give Bradford protection and some weapons, he'll produce. RGIII may not need the same level of protection or support, but he won't be great because his relative lack of accuracy will limit possessions and big plays.

When you are talking about a guy who half way through the season had more touchdowns than incompletions, I think it's pretty hard to bag on his accuracy.

RGIII is not Michael Vick from an accuracy perspective.

He's also not Vince Young or Colt McCoy, each of whom was VERY accurate in college, but not in the pros where they can't depend on dink and dunk passes all the way down the field.

Watch the throws he made all year long at Baylor. He threw the best deep ball in the nation, he has the 3 step drop, he can throw when flushed, etc. etc. The only concern with RGIII will be durability. He came to the combine looking great, but he doesn't have the heft of Cam Newton or Roethlisberger by any stretch. When he improvises, is he going to get rid of the ball before getting way-layed? Can he adjust to the speed of the NFL? Can he stand up to the NYG rush? These are the questions that will determine whether he can make it. His ability to understand the playbook and his accuracy won't.

[BD80]

What are you basing that on?

Bradford completed 67.9% of his passes in his last full college season (http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/sam-bradford-1.html), at a clip of 9.8 yards per attempt, which is really good.

Griffin completed 72.4% of his passes last season (http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/robert-griffin-iii-1.html) at a clip of 10.7 yards per attempt.

Listening to the talking heads who have been watching him throw.

A mobile QB is going to have a higher completion %, due to extending plays which breaks down coverage, and less intentional incompletions (unloading the ball). Hell, Andre Ware completed over 60% of his passes in college.

Bradford can make all the throws, I don't think the argument is whether he has the tools - he completed over 60% his rookie year. The issue is whether RGIII has the tools to make it. Running really, really fast is nice, particularly when the O-line sucks. But throwing is what sets a QB apart. I'd take Bradford over RGIII.

[Duvall]

Listening to the talking heads who have been watching him throw.

Which ones?

[BD80]

Which ones?

Today was the guys on NBCSports TV - whoever their NFL "experts" are. One was specifically talking about RGIII having alot of trouble with certain throws in "workouts" - so I guess he was referring to Baylor's Pro Day.

I have for months heard on ESPN that RGIII does not (yet) have elite accuracy - the level of accuracy that would make him a higher rated prospect. This could be compared to the likes of Luck, or Stafford, or Bradford, the recent and future high QB picks.

[A-Tex Devil]

Listening to the talking heads who have been watching him throw.

A mobile QB is going to have a higher completion %, due to extending plays which breaks down coverage, and less intentional incompletions (unloading the ball). Hell, Andre Ware completed over 60% of his passes in college.

Bradford can make all the throws, I don't think the argument is whether he has the tools - he completed over 60% his rookie year. The issue is whether RGIII has the tools to make it. Running really, really fast is nice, particularly when the O-line sucks. But throwing is what sets a QB apart. I'd take Bradford over RGIII.

Yeah. I am not sure you watched a lot of RGIII this year other than the bowl game, where he ran probably more than he did all year. He's a "mobile" QB in the sense that he can avoid the rush and improvise after the pass. He is not run first throw second like VY, Vick and Alex Smith were in college, and his rushing stats attest to that. I don' t know whether or not he'll be better than Bradford. They may be equally good and just different. But nothing I saw in college makes me believe Bradford had a better arm, accuracy or strength-wise, than RGIII did - while in college. But I will agree that if you think Bradford is going to be a solid NFL QB based on early returns, there is something to be said for a bird in hand.

[bjornolf]

According to this, the teams had been warned not to do this:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/17751262/report-nfl-takes-cap-space-from-cowboys-redskins-for-front-loading-deals

Best part is that this results from the Haynesworth deal - the gift that keeps on giving. Skins were in a very good position headed into Free Agency, and will not have to scramble just to fill out the roster.

So, two stupid questions:

1. They just added the "bad" contracts of the Skins together 21+15=$36M to get their penalty, while the Cowboys paid Austin $17M, but get a $10M penalty. What's up with that?

2. If the warnings were verbal, the league has admitted that there were no violations, and the league office approved the contracts (which is required for ALL trades and contracts), then how in the world can they retroactively punish them? All this could have been avoided if they just hadn't approved the contracts. And hey, I'll give you Hall's contract, but how the heck did the Skins get a "competitive" advantage out of their contract with Haynesworth?

[Dukeface88]

So, two stupid questions:

1. They just added the "bad" contracts of the Skins together 21+15=$36M to get their penalty, while the Cowboys paid Austin $17M, but get a $10M penalty. What's up with that?

2. If the warnings were verbal, the league has admitted that there were no violations, and the league office approved the contracts (which is required for ALL trades and contracts), then how in the world can they retroactively punish them? All this could have been avoided if they just hadn't approved the contracts. And hey, I'll give you Hall's contract, but how the heck did the Skins get a "competitive" advantage out of their contract with Haynesworth?

More importantly, isn't the league admitting that the owners (who are, legally, suposed to be operating as seperate businesses) came together to limit the salaries in an ostensibly free market? I don't know anti-trust/labor law, but that sounds a lot like price fixing, which is kinda illegal.

[bjornolf]

More importantly, isn't the league admitting that the owners (who are, legally, suposed to be operating as seperate businesses) came together to limit the salaries in an ostensibly free market? I don't know anti-trust/labor law, but that sounds a lot like price fixing, which is kinda illegal.

I've heard the term "collusion" batted around the last few days. It gets deeper too. Apparently, the head of the committee that decided this and one of its members were from the Giants and Eagles, and it was never sent out for a general vote by the owners. So, the Cowboys and Redskins are the only teams punished by a committee run by their rivals in the division? Tell me that isn't fishy.

[snowdenscold]

I've heard the term "collusion" batted around the last few days. It gets deeper too. Apparently, the head of the committee that decided this and one of its members were from the Giants and Eagles, and it was never sent out for a general vote by the owners. So, the Cowboys and Redskins are the only teams punished by a committee run by their rivals in the division? Tell me that isn't fishy.

Do they have any form of protest/objection/appeal?
Or what if they just said "we followed the rules, and we're not giving up our $36 million - what are you going to do about it?" and challenge the NFL to take action.

[bjornolf]

Do they have any form of protest/objection/appeal?
Or what if they just said "we followed the rules, and we're not giving up our $36 million - what are you going to do about it?" and challenge the NFL to take action.

A LOT of rumors floating around about a lawsuit. We'll see. Since the NFLPA approved it, supposedly there's not really anywhere to go except the courts.

[JasonEvans]

what if they just said "we followed the rules, and we're not giving up our $36 million - what are you going to do about it?" and challenge the NFL to take action.

I imagine the NFL could withhold the $36 mil (plus a penalty, perhaps?) from the TV rights check sent to the NFL which the NFL then distributes to the teams. It is a bit like telling your employer that you do not owe him $100 for an improper expense report. He just withholds it from your paycheck.

The teams, in all sports, have ceded a great deal of power to the commissioner's office. The commissioner's ability to police the leagues and level fines is pretty much limitless. It would be interesting to see someone challenge this in court tho.

-Jason "I would think this fine would severely handicap these teams this coming year... cap space = better players" Evans

[bjornolf]

I imagine the NFL could withhold the $36 mil (plus a penalty, perhaps?) from the TV rights check sent to the NFL which the NFL then distributes to the teams. It is a bit like telling your employer that you do not owe him $100 for an improper expense report. He just withholds it from your paycheck.

The teams, in all sports, have ceded a great deal of power to the commissioner's office. The commissioner's ability to police the leagues and level fines is pretty much limitless. It would be interesting to see someone challenge this in court tho.

-Jason "I would think this fine would severely handicap these teams this coming year... cap space = better players" Evans

It's not a fine. They're docking the Redskins' salary cap by $36M. In other words, they're saying that every other team can spend $X, but the Redskins are only allowed to spend $X-$36M. It's not like Dan Snyder NEEDS them to give him $36M to spend $36M. He's got one of the top 3 wealthiest franchises in the NFL, one of the top 5 in all professional sports. He can afford the money.

[kmspeaks]

It's not a fine. They're docking the Redskins' salary cap by $36M. In other words, they're saying that every other team can spend $X, but the Redskins are only allowed to spend $X-$36M. It's not like Dan Snyder NEEDS them to give him $36M to spend $36M. He's got one of the top 3 wealthiest franchises in the NFL, one of the top 5 in all professional sports. He can afford the money.

I would guess the league could do what it should have done in the first place if it didn't like what the Redskins did in 2010 and not approve contracts that would put them over the (lowered) salary cap.

[cato]

If the warnings were verbal, the league has admitted that there were no violations, and the league office approved the contracts (which is required for ALL trades and contracts), then how in the world can they retroactively punish them? All this could have been avoided if they just hadn't approved the contracts.

Just because the league office approved a contract does not necessarily absolve the team from any ramifications of entering into the contract. I have no idea of the rules in play, but would guess that this boils down to who was ultimately responsible for ensuring that the team didn't go over the cap.

For a much simpler analogy, assume you had a checking account with $100 in it. If you withdrew $1,000, and a teller mistakenly approved the withdrawal, do you think the bank would expect you to pay back the $900?

[bjornolf]

Just because the league office approved a contract does not necessarily absolve the team from any ramifications of entering into the contract. I have no idea of the rules in play, but would guess that this boils down to who was ultimately responsible for ensuring that the team didn't go over the cap.

For a much simpler analogy, assume you had a checking account with $100 in it. If you withdrew $1,000, and a teller mistakenly approved the withdrawal, do you think the bank would expect you to pay back the $900?

There...was...no...cap...to...go...over. That's the whole point. The NFL has admitted that no rules were broken. The Redskins took out $23 and the Cowboys withdrew $20 of their $100, then were penalized by the bank, who told them now they can only withdraw $15 while everyone else can get $21, because other account holders had agreed to only withdraw $17. The skins and boys had the money and there was NO rule against it, so I don't see how your analogy applies here. Since when do your bank's other customers have any right to tell you how much of your own money you can withdraw? The bank said "you probably shouldn't do that cause the other customers won't like it," but never told or wrote to them that there would be a penalty or what it would be. How would you like it if your bank did that to you?

The thing I find ironic is that two OF the teams that broke the non-existent cap were penalized, while the EIGHT owners who spent BELOW the usual cap's FLOOR were NOT punished. So overpaying your players is frowned upon, while paying your players LESS than the usual accepted amount is fine. Gotta love collusion.

The other irony here is that Haynesworth's contract wasn't even done that year. They did it in 2009, BEFORE the team was even sure that there would BE an uncapped year. Again, they took a calculated risk. The risk didn't work out because Haynesworth didn't play well. I find it sick that the Redskins are being punished for getting a competitive advantage for the contract on a player that hurt them on the field more than any player in decades.

[bjornolf]

I wonder if the owners will go after the Titans for an unfair competitive advantage now:

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/titans-life-contract-offer-manning-may-way-gain-162337118.html