just more speculation about RGIII

[tooge]

Well, at least they mention the chiefs


Robert Griffin trade rumors already spinning out of control
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on February 28, 2012, 4:04 PM EST

APForget the Combine. Forget free agency. Robert Griffin III trade chatter dominates the NFL discussion these days.

And it’s still February.

Perhaps Rams COO Kevin Demoff is right: It’s getting less crazy to imagine a deal could be completed before free agency. We’ve read and heard an unprecedented amount of trade rumors about the No. 2 overall pick for this time of year.

Let’s go over the latest:

1. Mike Jones of the Washington Post writes the Redskins would give up the No. 6 overall pick and next year’s first round pick in addition to multiple picks in the mid-to-upper rounds of the draft. Consider this the starting point for negotiations.

The Rams are reportedly looking for a similar package to the one San Diego netted for Eli Manning: Two firsts (including the No. 4 overall pick), a third- and fifth-round pick. The Redskins sound ready to meet this demand.

2. Texas A&M prospect Ryan Tannehill is watching the Griffin talk closely. Jones believes the Redskins would take Tannehill at No. 6 overal if they can’t get Griffin.

3. Terry Pluto of the Cleveland Plain-Dealer believes the Browns will ultimately have to give up three first-round picks in order to land Griffin. Do I hear four, Redskins? (This reminds us of a classic article by the Onion.)

4. Demoff told Peter King of SI.com that the Rams received a feeler from a team “you would never expect.” Does Kansas City count? If not, we’ll roll with Philadelphia as our irresponsible guess for a mystery team. Enter your pick below.

5. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch considers the Redskins the early favorite to land Griffin. This sounds true based on all the reports, plus Mike Shanahan’s close relationship with Jeff Fisher.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by aturnis

The Giants traded 2 1st round picks(Philip Rivers, '05 pick), a third rounder, and a 5th rounder. HOW ON EARTH IS THAT AN ENTIRE DRAFT?! Or even TWO for that matter?

So if you trade our first this year, a tagged Carr(who we're losing anyway), and a2nd or 3rd and a 4th or 5th. Then, receive one or two compensatory picks(from Orton and Shaun Smith), how in the hell is that TWO FULL DRAFTS?

Hell, trade our first, Carr, a 3rd and 5th this year and a 3rd next year and we still make out.

RG3, is worth it. Why don't you ask the Giants if Manning wasn't worth the risk.

You're serious? You really think a trade up from #11 to #2 is going to be even CLOSE to the compensation required to go up from #4 to #1? Especially given the enormous dropoff in talent when the Rams move that far?

And can we please stop with all the ridiculous conjecture that teams with great picks are going to want to trade for a very expensive CB?

[Epic Fail 007]

Originally Posted by Fat Elvis

If the Chiefs don't land RG3 or Peyton Manning, I will have a lot more time on my hands the next 4-5 years.

RG3 is just flat out exciting. Even if we didn't win a Super Bowl with him in the next five years, it sure would be fun to watch him play and develop.

I'm simply at the point where I would like SOMETHING exciting to happen with this franchise.

hmmmmmmm exciting over winning thats stupid

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by aturnis

The Giants traded 2 1st round picks(Philip Rivers, '05 pick), a third rounder, and a 5th rounder. HOW ON EARTH IS THAT AN ENTIRE DRAFT?! Or even TWO for that matter?

So if you trade our first this year, a tagged Carr(who we're losing anyway), and a2nd or 3rd and a 4th or 5th. Then, receive one or two compensatory picks(from Orton and Shaun Smith), how in the hell is that TWO FULL DRAFTS?

Hell, trade our first, Carr, a 3rd and 5th this year and a 3rd next year and we still make out.

RG3, is worth it. Why don't you ask the Giants if Manning wasn't worth the risk.

I agree with you and this is what I don't get. Some want a championship, but won't do what it takes to do it. Any thought of trading up gets shot down because it might be too expensive because we might "fail". Granted the way we have been doing it for 40+ years is safe, but has netted us 3 playoff wins. The Giants didn't think the cost for Eli was too high even though he might "fail". Funny enough they won more playoff games THIS YEAR than we have in over 40.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

You're serious? You really think a trade up from #11 to #2 is going to be even CLOSE to the compensation required to go up from #4 to #1? Especially given the enormous dropoff in talent when the Rams move that far?

And can we please stop with all the ridiculous conjecture that teams with great picks are going to want to trade for a very expensive CB?

We need to do whatever it takes to trade up. WTF do we have to lose? We have 3 playoff wins in 40+ years. The Giants have more playoff wins this year than we have in 40+. They were not afraid to do what it took to get Eli even though he might bust.

[splatbass]

Originally Posted by tredadda

I agree with you and this is what I don't get. Some want a championship, but won't do what it takes to do it. Any thought of trading up gets shot down because it might be too expensive because we might "fail". Granted the way we have been doing it for 40+ years is safe, but has netted us 3 playoff wins. The Giants didn't think the cost for Eli was too high even though he might "fail". Funny enough they won more playoff games THIS YEAR than we have in over 40.

We will have to trade a lot more than the Giants had to trade.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by tredadda

I agree with you and this is what I don't get. Some want a championship, but won't do what it takes to do it. Any thought of trading up gets shot down because it might be too expensive because we might "fail". Granted the way we have been doing it for 40+ years is safe, but has netted us 3 playoff wins. The Giants didn't think the cost for Eli was too high even though he might "fail". Funny enough they won more playoff games THIS YEAR than we have in over 40.

I don't think anybody has a problem offering the trade comp the Chargers sent to the Giants.

You would have to be INSANE to think that that would be even close to what the Rams want for this pick.

There is absolutely a line where the trade comp is too much. Risking one full draft, I don't have a problem with that. Risking two, which is what we will likely have to do, very big problem with that.

[Epic Fail 007]

Originally Posted by qabbaan

Being exciting has little to do with this... Michael Vick has been pimped as exciting for ten years and he is never going to win anything.

Your success as a QB in the NFL who gives your team a shot at winning the super bowl depends on your ability to be a pocket passer and not much else.

Your right . I wish the clueless kids around the world who think vick and qbs like him are all that. Would see that.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by tredadda

We need to do whatever it takes to trade up. WTF do we have to lose? We have 3 playoff wins in 40+ years. The Giants have more playoff wins this year than we have in 40+. They were not afraid to do what it took to get Eli even though he might bust.

What do we have to lose? 5-6 years.

I've stated before... if you give up 2 years of drafts, in 2-3 years, you're going to start losing a lot of your in-house talent, you'll have no young players to replace them, and your cap becomes too stretched to sign marquee free agents from the outside. If we give up 2 years of drafts, by 2015, RGIII's supporting cast is going to look significantly worse.

So the question is, do people feel comfortable that RGIII can be Peyton Manning? That he can be a QB that can carry a team on his back? Or will we use common sense and say that his upside is much more likely to be like Matt Ryan -- a very good QB who won't make the Super Bowl unless he gets the help of a great supporting cast?

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by splatbass

We will have to trade a lot more than the Giants had to trade.

Again, the Giants have more playoff wins this year than we have in 40 and some still want to play it safe? I just don't get it.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

You're serious? You really think a trade up from #11 to #2 is going to be even CLOSE to the compensation required to go up from #4 to #1? Especially given the enormous dropoff in talent when the Rams move that far?

And can we please stop with all the ridiculous conjecture that teams with great picks are going to want to trade for a very expensive CB?

Or they could fill their gaping CB hole with a 1st, 2nd round CB who winds up busting.

Seriously, Carr is a known, he is young, he is good and he has yet to reach his ceiling.

Also, we can always give up higher picks than the 3rd, 5th. A 2nd and 5th next year and our 3rd and 5th this year...

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by eric007

Your right . I wish the clueless kids around the world who think vick and qbs like him are all that. Would see that.

Vick also was a dumb as a box of rocks coming out. He also had no accuracy. The only similarities between him and RGIII are they are both fast and black QBs.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I don't think anybody has a problem offering the trade comp the Chargers sent to the Giants.

You would have to be INSANE to think that that would be even close to what the Rams want for this pick.

There is absolutely a line where the trade comp is too much. Risking one full draft, I don't have a problem with that. Risking two, which is what we will likely have to do, very big problem with that.

I agree that two drafts is too much. But it won't take two whole drafts to trade up.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by aturnis

Or they could fill their gaping CB hole with a 1st, 2nd round CB who winds up busting.

Seriously, Carr is a known, he is young, he is good and he has yet to reach his ceiling.

Also, we can always give up higher picks than the 3rd, 5th. A 2nd and 5th next year and our 3rd and 5th this year...

Again, you are absolutely crazy if you actually think we are going to win this trade without giving up at least or first 3 picks in 2012 and 2013. At least.

And no, teams (especially like the Rams) are not interested in signing a guy like Brandon Carr. They are teams building for the future much moreso than they are today. Why would they sign a guy for $10+ million when they can use that pick instead to draft a CB like Claiborne for a few mill? It's ridiculous to suggest that the Rams are so desperate to win now that they would trade away a blue chip pick for a guy who's going to break their bank.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

What do we have to lose? 5-6 years.

I've stated before... if you give up 2 years of drafts, in 2-3 years, you're going to start losing a lot of your in-house talent, you'll have no young players to replace them, and your cap becomes too stretched to sign marquee free agents from the outside. If we give up 2 years of drafts, by 2015, RGIII's supporting cast is going to look significantly worse.

So the question is, do people feel comfortable that RGIII can be Peyton Manning? That he can be a QB that can carry a team on his back? Or will we use common sense and say that his upside is much more likely to be like Matt Ryan -- a very good QB who won't make the Super Bowl unless he gets the help of a great supporting cast?

3 playoff wins in 40 years and yet you still worry about 5-6 years? I still think you are pulling a worst case scenario to justify your position. Lets put it this way, we played it safe the last 5-6 years and have what to show for it?

[mcaj22]

even if the Rams cut that overrated o-lineman they are in no position to be overspending on a 10 mil contract on Brandon Carr

that hurts them, a rebuilding team, more than it helps. The Rams want the future they don't want high priced present day talent.

Brandon Carr has enormous value to win now/media market teams. Not a team like the Rams