Romo or RGIII?

[Hostile]

Originally Posted by SkinsFan28

as i said ugh. Believe you me that played into my mind with the Griffin trade, but I was sold on him - see my explanation in the NFL zone - so I didn't fret it. I did however advise my brother not to get his jersey because if he does bust, with what we traded for him, would go down as the biggest bust ever (and i am not talking about Dolly Parton!)

So let me ask you Hostile, I know you are a history buff, so you surely know that many of Griffin's stats are in historic proportions, ie his TD/Int ratio rivals Marino, his completion % so high, first ever rookie qb to have back to back 4td games, top 5 all time passer rating for his 1st game, etc. Given that this is true (I am open to correction but the overall point remains the same - much of his numbers are historically elite), at what point would you make the trade straight up - Romo v Griffin?

Hard to answer because I don't believe either team would even consider the trade. I think if Washington offered it and I were Jerry Jones I'd trip over myself to do it right now. But I also think that would be a dumb move that is purely marketing more than a belief this leads to the promised land. Jerry is a marketing guy looking for the glory hole. That's my answer in a purely fantasy world where a trade like this is offered.

In the real world, I'd need to see 3 years of progression and production to even consider giving up on a QB that is clearly one of the few bright spots I have on my team, and isn't the reason why we're not going any further than we are.

[RW Hitman]

Originally Posted by ufcrules1

Nice. There isn't one Redskin fan on this earth who would trade RG3 for Romo.

you have to look at age and future at this stage....

If, as a GM mind you (very important), you think your team has everything it needs and is just one or two players away, you stick with Romo who has the ability now.
If you are building a team for future years, then you go with the younger guy who can be good for years in RG III.

[Hostile]

Originally Posted by SkinsHokieFan

Despite all of that nonsense, we are far better positioned to win this decade then the Cowboys are.

Griffin being the big reason.

Talk about a cherry picked condition. We're not quite done with our 3rd year of the decade and you have a 22 year old rookie stud while I have a guy who may or may not play to the end of the decade. Get your shades, your future looks bright.

BTW, I am one bitter, bitter man over the fact you guys are exiting your place in the NFC East cellar. 4 straight years and 6 of the last 8 years. Pisses me off. I am placated slightly by the Eagles stealing your spot.

[SkinsFan28]

Originally Posted by Hostile

Hard to answer because I don't believe either team would even consider the trade. I think if Washington offered it and I were Jerry Jones I'd trip over myself to do it right now. But I also think that would be a dumb move that is purely marketing more than a belief this leads to the promised land. Jerry is a marketing guy looking for the glory hole. That's my answer in a purely fantasy world where a trade like this is offered.

In the real world, I'd need to see 3 years of progression and production to even consider giving up on a QB that is clearly one of the few bright spots I have on my team, and isn't the reason why we're not going any further than we are.

Agree with you 95%

Griffin will be a marketing bonanza if he even maintains for a couple of years.

I would think 3 years is a bit stretching, by that I mean, you want to see the first year, and maybe 2/3rds of the the 2nd, unless of course the 2nd year is a strong deviation from the first. Not sure what the extra year gets you except a higher trade cost if his 2nd years numbers remained strong.

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by ufcrules1

Our team SHOULD be in full rebuilding mode but we have an owner who is too stupid to realize that. We are always "One or two players away", or one or 2 wins away from reaching the playoffs, etc.

According to you all the Cowboys need is another QB ANY QB other than Romo and they would be winning.

[KJJ]

Originally Posted by SkinsFan28

Griffin will be a marketing bonanza if he even maintains for a couple of years.

Jerry Jones would trade Romo in a heart beat for RG3 just for that reason alone.

[dalboy]

come back to me after he has his sophomore slump

[SkinsFan28]

Originally Posted by KJJ

Jerry Jones would trade Romo in a heart beat for RG3 just for that reason alone.

Just look at it from this poll alone. 57% of diehard cowboy fans (i didn't vote, subtract whatever other percent or 2 for the skins fans that did vote) are willing to trade their starting qb for griffin straight up. Griffin's marketing appeal is going to be crazy high. And he's pretty good at commercials already (adidas - the light gets into your head, or several gatorade spots). According to ***** Sporting Goods Jersey sales Griffin is the current leading jersey out of all NFL players. craziness.

[bbailey423]

Originally Posted by SkinsHokieFan

Despite all of that nonsense, we are far better positioned to win this decade then the Cowboys are.

Griffin being the big reason.

here is where you need to slow you roll. I voted to trade RG3 for Romo...but I also said the Redskins always find a way to screw something up...and until they prove otherwise...I think they will screw this up to. Right now....EVERY game you take the field without RG3...you would lose. Yes, I said it. With either Grossman or Beck...the Skins would be winless right now. Also, unless you field a better team around RG3...the team will still never be better than .500. Cowboys fans know firsthand how many years can go by with good QB play not resulting in much.

[slaga]

Originally Posted by Hostile

In the real world, I'd need to see 3 years of progression and production to even consider giving up on a QB that is clearly one of the few bright spots I have on my team, and isn't the reason why we're not going any further than we are.

You would rather let him spend 3 years in another system, ideally getting better in that system, and then try to grab him when his stock is at its highest? And then turn around and change the offensive system he is accustomed to?

I'd think if you are willing to trade you do it now, and don't lose valuable time that he could be learning / running your offensive system. Even if he has a 15 year career, you just wasted 20% of it letting him be in someone elses system.

[Hostile]

Originally Posted by SkinsFan28

Agree with you 95%

Griffin will be a marketing bonanza if he even maintains for a couple of years.

I would think 3 years is a bit stretching, by that I mean, you want to see the first year, and maybe 2/3rds of the the 2nd, unless of course the 2nd year is a strong deviation from the first. Not sure what the extra year gets you except a higher trade cost if his 2nd years numbers remained strong.

I nearly said 2 years but I said 3 because I don't want to say a sophomore slump that often happens as we know is the deal killer.

I hope that made sense.

[slaga]

Originally Posted by bbailey423

here is where you need to slow you roll. I voted to trade RG3 for Romo...but I also said the Redskins always find a way to screw something up...and until they prove otherwise...I think they will screw this up to. Right now....EVERY game you take the field without RG3...you would lose. Yes, I said it. With either Grossman or Beck...the Skins would be winless right now. Also, unless you field a better team around RG3...the team will still never be better than .500. Cowboys fans know firsthand how many years can go by with good QB play not resulting in much.

Beck is not a Redskin and Grossman has not dressed for a single game this year. I doubt Grossman sees the field this year at all no matter what happens.

[SkinsFan28]

Originally Posted by Hostile

I nearly said 2 years but I said 3 because I don't want to say a sophomore slump that often happens as we know is the deal killer.

I hope that made sense.

yep, that was why I said unless there was a strong deviation (my way of saying sophomore slump )

[SkinsFan28]

Originally Posted by slaga

You would rather let him spend 3 years in another system, ideally getting better in that system, and then try to grab him when his stock is at its highest? And then turn around and change the offensive system he is accustomed to?

I'd think if you are willing to trade you do it now, and don't lose valuable time that he could be learning / running your offensive system. Even if he has a 15 year career, you just wasted 20% of it letting him be in someone elses system.

When you have a starter in place, who probably has 5-6 years left, and has a consistent high passer rating, and brings value to the team. Yes I could understand letting a trade on a 12 week old rookie qb go. Obviously this trade was just a discussion point since the Redskins aren't entertaining trade offers for Griffin, and certainly not within the division straight up (all though I did hear that Tom Cruise really likes Nick Foles )

[Hostile]

Originally Posted by SkinsFan28

yep, that was why I said unless there was a strong deviation (my way of saying sophomore slump )

In truth, if I am the gambler like Jerry is and this kid's jersey is selling like you mentioned, I do it.

But I want to win, and I think your options are blunted with a rookie and a potential sophomore slump, so I wouldn't make that fictional trade. Which is why my answer was no.