Skip to content

Need to Know: Redskins have discovered that there are no guarantees late in the first round

Apr 14, 2016, 5:02 AM EDT

1cdd2-campbell

Here is what you need to know on this Thursday, April 14, 14 days before the NFL Draft.

Timeline

—The Redskins last played a game 95 days ago. It will be about 150 days until they play another one.

Days until: Redskins offseason workouts start 4; 2016 NFL draft 14; Redskins training camp starts 105

Hot topic

The Redskins seem to be in unfamiliar territory with a pick in the latter part of the first round and the numbers bear out the feeling. Since the 1970 merger they have only made first-round selections between picks 20 and 32 five times. They have done, well, you can judge for yourself.

1981—G Mark May (20th overall) An original Hog who was good enough to start in two Super Bowls. Among the original Gibbs O-line, he certainly ranked behind Russ Grimm and Joe Jacoby and probably Jeff Bostic. He left following the 1989 season and finished his career with the Chargers and Cardinals.

1983—CB Darrell Green (32nd) Yeah, I think that Bobby Beathard scored a pretty good hit on this pick.

1996—OT Andre Johnson (30th) This is clearly one of the worst first-round picks in team history. Not only did Johnson never play a snap for the Redskins (he did play three games for the Lions in 1998), the Redskins traded up with the Cowboys to get him.

2002—QB Patrick Ramsey (32nd) I think he had the arm and the aptitude to be pretty good, but we’ll never know because Steve Spurrier wasn’t too good at drawing up pass protection schemes. Ramsey was shell-shocked after getting sacked 71 times in his first 29 starts in Washington. He was on the rosters of the Jets and Broncos after being traded after the 2005 season but he never started another game.

2005—QB Jason Campbell (25th) He was the starter for three and a half years and the only time the team made the playoffs during that time was when he suffered a knee injury late in the2007 season and Todd Collins came in and steered the Redskins to the postseason. It wasn’t all his fault but he never quite got over the hump to become a consistently effective quarterback.

Stat of the day

Bobby Beathard was the GM of the Redskins for 11 drafts (1978-1988). He only used three first-round draft picks. Two of them, Art Monk and Darrell Green, are in the Hall of Fame.

In case you missed it

  1. abanig - Apr 14, 2016 at 5:31 AM

    So has Scot McCloughan like when he took Kentawn Balmer when he was GM in San Francisco. The interview Scot did the other day he talked about a player that had all the physical ability but just never could get over the hump and make it in the league, I think he was referring to Balmer there without naming his name. If you all remember, Shanahan signed him in 2011, he played 3 games with the team but then the next offseason he just left the team and quit without telling anyone.

    • troylok - Apr 14, 2016 at 5:35 AM

      Good example, abanig. It just goes to show you can do your homework on a player but if something just isn’t right in the room upstairs, it isn’t going to happen.

      • ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Apr 14, 2016 at 8:59 AM

        That’s why we all need to bring out our lucky rabbit’s foot, etc. on on Thursday, April 28.
        ~

        • bangkokben - Apr 14, 2016 at 9:58 AM

          That sounds like a lot of three-legged rabbits.

      • Trey Gregory - Apr 15, 2016 at 2:42 AM

        As hard as these guys try, you never know how a player will react to the NFL. Some guys are so cocky that they don’t think they have to work hard to improve. Some get comfortable with the money/lifestyle and get lazy. Some can’t handle the pressure, etc., etc. Then some guys were like that in college, get drafted late, wake up and turn into hard workers and good players. You never truly know. Every NFL prospect is athletically gifted. So much of it is what happens between their ears after they’re drafted.

  2. colorofmyskinz - Apr 14, 2016 at 6:04 AM

    We all know that we are much better with Scot M driving and making recruiting decisions than anyone we have had in the past 20 years at GM. It one took 1 year to show us “what good looks like”. So very exciting for him to deliver our second draft! We are in good hands I trust.

    OT – Silas Redd: wow, what a bummer. I did not realize he had been reprimanded in November as well. Somehow I missed that. We all talked about how you have to be a complete junkie to be caught so many times by the NFL. They all but give you every bit of warning necessary to not screw up your drug testing. We know that 60% or more of the NFL and NBA are completely chronic users of pot and drugs, just most do it responsibly to not get caught by the testing. We have serious issues at running back depth now. I think we need 2 RBs in the draft now. Or 1 FA and 1 draft minimum. We literally have zero RB depth. We went from deep 2-heading running monster to nothing in one season.

    RB now a huge issue requiring a different attention and strategy in the draft.

    • Rich Tandler - Apr 14, 2016 at 6:52 AM

      The Redskins need RB depth, no doubt about it, but Redd’s absence doesn’t change much of anything. He probably wasn’t going to make the roster last year before the injury and he wasn’t being counted on this year.

      • colorofmyskinz - Apr 14, 2016 at 7:27 AM

        Rich respectively I have to disagree here. The only reason Silas was out last year and not capable of making the 53 was because we carried a fullback and we carried two starting running back’s with Morris and Jones. Once we got rid of a DY and Morris all the sudden the importance of Silas adding to our depth became more critical for us this year.

        We also have not re-sign Pierre . So truly we are down three running back’s this year versus last year and again I think that pointed towards the importance of Silas at least be an inner depths. So now with Silas out we’re down 4 running backs compared to what we had last year.

        Just seems like Silas at least had a place in depth this year being that we are with out so many running backs this year.

        • Rich Tandler - Apr 14, 2016 at 7:55 AM

          Well, you can disagree if you’d like but I can tell you that i heard from multiple sources that unless someone else had been injured he had zero chance of making the 53 last year. And they were going to draft a back and/or sign Thomas or someone like him whether Redd was healthy or not. Redd was not in their plans for 2015 or for 2016.

          He would have been camp fodder, a guy to take the preseason carries.

          Again, believe whatever you’d like to. But Redd was not in their plans.

        • mattphillipsdc - Apr 14, 2016 at 8:29 AM

          I have to agree with Rich. It’s painfully obvious now he let drugs ruin his football career. When you’re a bubble player and you still risk getting high shows a lack of commitment to the game.

        • wvredskins - Apr 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM

          Yeah def not like he was a big part of our plans going forward.

        • weneedlinemen42 - Apr 15, 2016 at 5:20 AM

          Redd was undrafted. Those sort of “picks” are easy to replace.

          The UDFA pool is always deep at RB. There is always another Redd out there who can be had. Someone with talent that destroyed their draft value but might be able to turn things round in the pros.

          With current draft theory suggesting that “good” backs can be found later in the draft, more and more RB talent is being shifted into the UDFA pool. So, whilst I am worried about finding legitimate competition for the starting job, replacing Redd is going to be easy.

      • Chad - Apr 14, 2016 at 3:09 PM

        Agreed 10000% been saying this since last year, if not for injury he would already be gone. This year he was a camp body, period.

    • Chad - Apr 14, 2016 at 3:06 PM

      We still have 4 rb on the roster. Redd wasn’t gonna make the team anyway I thought. He would of been a camp body and get cut questions or 2nd round of cut downs.

  3. Jlb12300 - Apr 14, 2016 at 8:30 AM

    The only reason we had so many backs last year was injuries. When Jones went down we got Thomas. With Paul taking the fullback role all we need is 1 from the draft and maybe resign Thomas. I will miss Young and his goal line pounding.

  4. blazerguy234 - Apr 14, 2016 at 8:33 AM

    As has been said, it is much more about who is running the drafting for Washington. How many horrible drafts did we have with Vinnie? Allen did not do well. Scot is a big time talent, and he is looking for guys that fit in to his definition of ” a football player”…no matter where the are on the board..or as a free agent, or unsigned kid out of school.

  5. goback2rfk - Apr 14, 2016 at 8:37 AM

    The Redskins have discovered there is no guarantees with early in the round picks like when they drafted the hobbled Rob Griff iii

    • bangkokben - Apr 14, 2016 at 10:06 AM

      It appears the Rams have learned it’s best to be at the top to get the guy you want.

      • ET - Apr 14, 2016 at 1:05 PM

        Can’t say that I blame them. They’ve had decent personnel without a field kommandant for some time now.

        Plus it’s great theater!

      • Trey Gregory - Apr 15, 2016 at 2:47 AM

        Despite what so many people think Denver proved in 2015, that was an anomaly. Every so often a team with a bad QB and great defense does something. But the perrinneal playoff teams all have stability with their coach and QB. It’s still true that there’s two types of teams in the NFL: those with QBs, and those without. The Rams got sick of being the latter. It’s hard to rely on getting a historically good defense to carry your franchise.

        • bangkokben - Apr 15, 2016 at 9:19 AM

          More importantly is that window for a “historically good defense.” That window is tight with so many moving parts. The Broncos have lost Jackson, Trevathan, and others. Father Time is also catching up to Ware. The Broncos defense is still top five but not dominant. It isn’t likely to carry the team as far as it did last year.

        • Trey Gregory - Apr 15, 2016 at 10:13 AM

          I’m surprised Ware is still playing as well as he did last year. I agree that time should catch up to him pretty quick. And, while Seattle has done a pretty good job keeping their core defensive players together, it is hard to do that year in and out. You’re correct that it’s hard to keep a unit like that together. Because of free agency and the cap. But, if you have one Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Russell Wilson, Big Ben, Aaron Rogers, etc., etc., then you have a good shot at making the playoffs every year. Even with mediocre players on defense.

          And it’s not just the elite QBs. Some less than elite QBs still put their teams in positions for the playoffs year in and out if there’s stability. You basically have to have that guy.

        • bangkokben - Apr 15, 2016 at 10:53 AM

          I’m agreeing with you. You have to have that guy for stability and it gives you the best chance to win consistently. That’s why they should lock Cousins down with the deal I’ve been suggesting. BUT, having that guy guarantees you nothing but making the playoffs three out of every four years – if that.

        • Trey Gregory - Apr 15, 2016 at 11:35 AM

          I would honestly take that. I don’t know why everyone is so obsessed with Super Bowls. I get it, they’re cool and you get bragging rights. But the season is more than 1 game. I get personal enjoyment watching my team play well. And I get even more when they win. I’m happy for the whole week. So if they win more than they lose, that’s a great season for me. A great couple months.

          I can’t stand having people dismiss my team before they even take the field, call them bottom feeders, dysfunctional, etc., etc. I just want them to have a legitimate chance any week, and for them to be respectable. I would take 10 years of making the playoffs, and going 8-8 the years they don’t, over 10 years with 1 Super Bowl mixed with 2-14 seasons. The regular season matters to me.

          And we all know that the best teams don’t always win the Super Bowl. There’s so much chance and circumstance that goes into the post season. It would be nice, but I don’t need that to enjoy the season. It’s not a zero sum game to me.

          But I think you would also agree that your chances of assembling a supporting cast and actually winning a Super Bowl significantly increase if you have that guy. So, it’s win win for me. Just find that guy.

    • Chad - Apr 15, 2016 at 7:07 PM

      Doesn’t make sense because it’s not true. Rg3 got hurt his rookie season. If you are talking about his prior knee surgery, we’ll all I have to say is he outran many CB and S all year long till his pro career injury.

  6. renhoekk2 - Apr 14, 2016 at 9:27 AM

    I think going forward any personnel decisions that occurred during the time Vinny Cerrato was here need to be omitted from the team history, as if they never actually occurred. Or at the very least be marked with an asterisk. Draft selections, free agent signings, trades, whatever. Remember the one off-season where the master plan was to sign a bunch of Restricted Free Agents and give away draft picks in return. None of it actually happened.

  7. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Apr 14, 2016 at 9:42 AM

    Yuge trade. YUGE!

    Jason La Canfora Verified account@JasonLaCanfora

    Will be a lot of happy teams picking 4-8 or so who want D. Trade means QBs virtually certain to go 1-2, Tunsil goes high. Bosa, Buckner fall
    ~

  8. hotpicksblog - Apr 14, 2016 at 9:50 AM

    Scott McCloughin Just found his trading Partner in Tennessee. Looks like the Skins won’t be having to worry about pick 21 after all. I think I’ll go bowling on draft day number 1.

    • pdxskin - Apr 14, 2016 at 10:29 AM

      Interesting thought – Tennessee now has three 2nd round picks and two 3rd rounders in this draft.. If they did want to move back up into the back half of the 1st round, they will certainly have the ammo available to do it!

      • Chad - Apr 14, 2016 at 2:56 PM

        They are still in the 1st round now. They have the 15th i think. They may package that pick and a late 2nd and move back into top 10.
        Really after that possibility, imo they should sit still and let the board come to them. More picks are better then less by trading up for 1 player. say they trade 2 or maybe 3 picks away to move into late first(not sure if this was your point or you thought they didn’t have a 1 anymore?) then you lose 2 extra picks and you have better chance to hit with more players. Not saying I’m right over you, just giving my opinion along with yours.

    • Chad - Apr 14, 2016 at 2:57 PM

      Don’t think 1st round will be traded, 3rd round I see them moving that pick. To me that makes more sense.

    • Trey Gregory - Apr 15, 2016 at 10:18 AM

      I truly hope that’s not true. I think trading out of the first would be a huge mistake. In Scot we trust and all but the guy isn’t literally a miracle worker. He can’t literally pull blue chips from any round.

      This is a franchise that’s been missing some elite talent because they traded away their first round picks. We need those blue chippers. Yes, we need role players too, but we need difference makers as well.

      I think people are a little too drunk on the idea of trading back for more picks. Like there’s no way that could fail. First rounders can bust. But the further back you go, the better the chance a guy doesn’t become a starter. I would prefer to at least keep our first two picks, but hopefully first three. Then Scot can do whatever he wants. Use the shotgun approach all over the later rounds to try and fish out some solid players. But take the guys who are available early.

  9. Chad - Apr 14, 2016 at 2:51 PM

    I remember all those Picks. When they took darel green I was like who???

    As far as Campbell, we traded up to get him, and to be honest he was a mid 2nd rounder imo. We didn’t need to make that trade. Not sure if Gibbs or Vinny( gone or was still here?) MADE that decision.

    • weneedlinemen42 - Apr 15, 2016 at 5:36 AM

      Not that my opinion has any weight, but I always suspected that Gibbs had control over which players were acquired but that it was Cerrato who went out and actually got them and did the trades and contracts.

      I’m sure Gibbs wouldn’t have come back if he didn’t have control, but his second tenure was notable for the amount of delegation. Gibbs was much older, had much more going on in his life outside football and wanted to avoid burning out again. So, whilst I doubt he would have allowed someone to dictate the players he had, I doubt he would have wanted to take over the “grunt work” involved in actually running the front office.

      Cerrato will also have been keen to retain some sort of role and that sort of power sharing compromise would probably have appealed to both men. Gibbs, so he didn’t have to spend time negotiating with players and GMs. Cerrato, so that he could keep his salary.

      The problem this would have created is that Cerrato would then have been under serious pressure to get whoever Gibbs identified. I think this would go a long way to explain why we were so profligate during that era. Gibbs would identify a player he wanted and then Cerrato would overpay to make sure he never became the guy who denied Joe Gibbs a player.

      • pyroman99 - Apr 15, 2016 at 6:00 AM

        That’s an interesting theory on the relationship between Gibbs and Cerrato, and it explains a few things. As great a coach as Joe was, he suffered the fate of virtually everyone who’s tried to be both HC and GM – trying to compress 2 full-time jobs into a single full-time day. And depending on Cerrato for due diligence on personnel was, well, insert your own metaphor for idiocy.

RealRedskins.com Archives

Follow Us On Twitter