Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace
I really don't understand this continued argument. If we extend him for next year, you'll have a point. As it is, this doesn't make any difference in the draft.
|
Agreed.
I mean hell, worst case scenario is he somehow makes the difference in a couple of games and we win maybe 2 more than we would have. So maybe we'd move down around 6-8 spots in the draft order. At that point we'd probably have to trade up to get a guy (or give up more for a trade up we'd have done anyway). On balance, it costs us maybe a 3rd rounder more than it would have.
I'm willing to go ahead and give up an extra pick or something if it means this team actually playing football with a decent quarterback for several weeks so we'll know for certain where/how we'll need to improve next year.
Guys - 'punting' 6 games costs us
massive developmental time, not to mention a significant amount of review and analysis. We can gain a lot of knowledge over these 6 games if the team is committed to doing so.
Would I rather see Stanzi? Yup, but the staff isn't going to go that route. So this is an acceptable alternative, IMO. He's also a guy that would absolutely be a viable option for a year or two while we groom a young QB, especially a project like RGIII.