If you're a baseball fan, or have some background with making managerial decisions in the business world, you're probably familiar with the theoretical concept of replacement level, or at least some of it's deviations.  The whole conceptual idea is to establish a baseline--no matter what the measure of performance is--at which the level of production is no longer unique to the person providing it.  In other words, the performance loses it's value because the pool of performers capable of replicating it is large enough and accessable enough to "replace" the performer at minimal cost.  It's why you're local elementary school music teacher probably doesn't get paid as much as the principal's secretary.  While both roles require competent people who can handle business in a professional manner, it takes less education and preparation to go in and be able to play instruments and get a group of 9-year-olds to sign a few songs in tune in preparation for the recital than it does to be able to organize and plan someone's schedule each day for an entire school year.

It might even be the case that the music teacher has more work to do than the secretary.  This person directly impacts the lives of many younglings, and has to be able to work with both an entire group and struggling individuals to make the whole product run in perfect synergy.  It's a difficult task, and that's why schools employ professionals to handle it.  The concept of replacement level suggests that there are many members of the hypothetical community who could step into the role should the music teacher have to go on maternity leave, or something similar, and could execute the job without much risk of "ruining" the classroom.  If the same thing happens to the secretary, the school board might chose to bring in an aide from another school in the district, or consolidate the role.  They wouldn't employ a member of the community with no background in the field of work.

The real reason the Redskins have failed to win consistently in the free agency era is because of a fundamental, but consistent, misunderstanding of the replacement level concept.  In a game where teams can roster 53 players, it's impossible to get through a year without receiving a sub-replacement performance from someone, probably even a major contributor on your team.  Recent ex-Redskin Fred Smoot is a common target of this blog, and others, for his complete inability to cover anyone, and having players like Smoot on the team is avoidable.  Sometimes though, you can get a string of sub-replacement games from an unexpected source, such as Laron Landry.  This is much less avoidable.  The Redskins, in hindsight, would have been better off in 2009 with a replacement level free safety on the roster instead of Laron Landry, but there was no one that had this projected before the season, and there was never a time during the season where it ever seemed obvious that giving Landry's roster spot to someone off the street such as Corey Chavous, Dexter Jackson, or Dwight Smith would have improved the team.  Although the replacement-level concept would suggest otherwise, sometimes a team just has to live, or at least have an allowance for, a sub-replacement performance.

Where the Redskins have gone so wrong since 1994, but particularly since 2000, is in the misvaluation of players that are above replacement level under the guise that they are receiving above average performance, when they are not.  This mistake has been visable not only in moves the Redskins have made, but also personnel moves that the Redskins have tried to make but haven't executed, such as the QB saga of 2009.

What I am going to focus on today is the fact that not all positions are created equal in terms of where the replacement level is.  Some positions have a relatively high replacement level, such as safety, running back, center, and defensive line.  Other positions have a relatively low replacement level: wide receiver, tight end, linebackers, and specialty players.  Quarterbacks, Guards, and Cornerbacks tend to fall right in the middle.  But the position that completely dwarfs the system in the quality of replacement player in the modern game is the offensive tackle position, and the Redskins offensive failures since 2007 can be directly related to a fundamental mis-evaluation, not of the talent on their own roster, but of the offensive tackles (and wide receivers, as well) salary structure as it relates to the replacement level concept.

In 2007, the Redskins had an above average left tackle (Chris Samuels), a league average right tackle (Jon Jansen), a journeyman replacement level type who they thought could start at LG (Todd Wade), and a prospect undrafted free agent rookie (Stephon Heyer).  This was a pretty good group, all things considered.   But when Jansen went and ruptured his achillies in Week 1, we were about to find out how ill-prepared the Redskins were to deal with having a hole at the tackle position, something they hadn't dealt with in a team-building sense since drafting Samuels in 2000.

It might be hard to think of it this way now, but Jansen was an incredibly durable player throughout his career.  His season ending injuries in 2004 and 2007 were obviously not the norm, and could have happened to anyone.  When he got injured in 2004, the Redskins had 42-year old Ray Brown in reserve to handle Jansen's absence.  The Redskins never really had to deal with the replacement concept before, but Todd Wade was a different type of player.  The Redskins had just signed him to a contract extension after he had just one start in 2006, but Wade was not any more prepared to play right tackle (or left guard) for the Redskins that year than any number of unsigned, unwanted players who had the same level of experience at the position.  The Redskins' nearly comical non-chalantness towards this roster shortcoming (not even admitting a failure of the Wade-at-LG plan until a training camp deal for Pete Kendall of the Jets) turned to action when Todd Wade's play necessitated the genesis of the Stephon Heyer era at the RT position in Washington.  As the Redskins casted Todd Wade out at years end--as tends to be the norm with replacement level players--they didn't make a move to address a weakening position as much as they just moved Jason Fabini out to right tackle to be a replacement level player in Wade's place.

Heyer was being pressed into service at RT, all while remaining the primary contingency plan to Chris Samuels at LT.  From training camp 2007 until November 2009, the Redskins never made any effort to acquire a player who was above replacement level to back up Samuels, instead, if Samuels ever couldn't play, Heyer would go in at LT.  It didn't matter that the Redskins outed Jansen (along with Fabini), at the conclusion of the 2008 season, giving the job to Heyer full-time, Heyer was still the contingency plan to Samuels at LT.  As Heyer was starting to lose his prospect status without gaining any sort of value around the league, the team was thrusting more and more responsibility upon him.  They, of course, would sign Mike Williams, Jeremy Bridges, and D'Anthony Batiste in an attempt to bolster the back-up tackle position with pure free agent wire fodder.  Heyer never was able to achieve much more than what he started with in 2009, though through an improvement of his run blocking, he became the one above average run blocker on the Redskins OL in 2009.  When Samuels suffered a career ending injury in Week 5 of 2009, whatever cloak the Redskins had over their poorly executed plan fell to the ground.

The one thing that replacement level offensive tackles have that no other position has to worry about is that they cannot be hidden by the scheme.  In the weeks following Samuels injury, the Redskins' tackle tandem of Mike Williams at RT and D'Anthony Batiste/Stephon Heyer at LT could have easily been bested by the roster building abilities of a UFL expansion team, who only has NFL camp releases to choose from.  But, to be frank, all teams have to deal with this phenomenon at some point or another, and most rely on strong coaching structure to help get the ship to shore while the highly paid labor gets healthy.  The part where the Redskins screwed up was where they assumed that the offensive tackle position was no different from all the other positions on a football field in terms of freely available talent.

It's simply not the case.  When the Redskins signed Levi Jones to help stop the bleeding in a lost season, they pretty much had only a few veteran options available at LT, and they included Jones, Jonas Jennings, George Foster, or Kwame Harris.  With the exception of Jennings, those are all past-their-prime former first round picks who, in the case of Foster or Harris, never actually developed anyway.  When you look at the replacement level for every other position, it's not nearly this dire.  If Jason Campbell had gotten a season-ending injury, and the Redskins had been watching Todd Collins get the crap kicked out of him behind this offensive line, they could have signed Gus Frerotte or Damon Huard off the scrap heap.  These are unwanted players, definitionally replacement level, but these players were successful NFL passers as recently as 2007, much like Collins, except that they aren't getting 3 million per year.  If DeAngelo Hall had gotten hurt, the Redskins could have signed a Chris McAllister or a Mike McKenzie to carry the team for a few weeks, players who a year or two ago, were considered a key cog of their team's defense.

The Redskins' offense has not been able to score since the Jansen injury because they have not bothered to replace him.  Since Heyer held prospect status, there have been no prospects on the Redskins roster.  League average play has been a struggle to find on the offensive line, but at tackle, pure respectability has eluded them.  At most offensive positions, you'll find that the Redskins aren't exactly stacked with potential, and that their back-ups would not likely be picked up by another team when released.  You'll see this phenomenon this year.  Todd Collins is likely not going to be picked up, and Ladell Betts and Rock Cartwright are going to be out on the street for a considerable amount of time.  Todd Yoder is probably going to opt for retirement.  Randy Thomas may, or may not, be interested in landing a one year deal.  And poor Levi Jones is not going to get another offer from a team that isn't Washington, no matter how weak the offensive tackles market appears.  This is the replacement level concept at work.  The million dollar question is: how does the new Redskins brass understand the concept?

The results are obviously not complete through a few days of free agency, but they are promising.  The Redskins did not sign below average tackles such as Chad Clifton and Tony Pashos to mulit-year contracts, despite an obvious need at the position.  They did sign Artis Hicks, a replacement level lineman, to a 3-year contract, but considering his experience in scheme and versatility, the signing can be defended as a stand-alone additions.  If the team ends up with two other Artis Hicks' clones, it's not a good sign.

Here's where the real key will come: if the Redskins start to add actual prospects to the roster via the draft instead of the replacement level types who would instead occupy the position.  If the Redskins sign the replacement-level Barry Sims, and he makes the team (but not as a starter), that's not a good sign of improvement.  But if they spent a fifth round pick on a developmental tackle, and he makes the team, that's a much better sign.

If the team is serious about it's desire for offensive improvement, whomever plays quarterback for the Redskins in 2010 is an irrelivant player.  Improvement will come from who lands the LT and RT positions in the offense.  This does not mean the Redskins should not take a quarterback early in the draft if the prospect is deemed to be one of the best available players within the next three years, but that passing up the opportunity to land a franchise LT should not excuse the team from the required offensive line improvement.  The Redskins need to start building around players who are like a present day Chris Samuels and Jon Jansen, and currently they have no prospects who can live up to either role.  The success or failure of the upcoming season should ultimately be judged by the steps the Redskins take to reach this goal.  Add prospects now, and watch as they start to fulfull their ability to be part of the next great tackle tandem for the Redskins.

There are positions where a replacement player is unavoidable, but offensive tackle might be the one position on the field where it must be avoided, and at all costs.

After a 47 year run, I have resigned as a Washington Redskins season ticket holder. Tom Boswell's column in today's Washington Post gets at the reason why.

Boswell's piece New approach could help the Washington Redskins change directions opens with:

"Rumors of an outbreak of sanity at Redskins Park cannot be totally discounted. After 11 seasons of kaleidoscopic calamity, don't get fooled too fast. But maybe the 12th time will be a charm."

but ends with:

"You can get a new coach with two Super Bowl rings and an experienced GM with an Allen pedigree; you can cultivate the owner's best traits, not worst; you can get younger and demand more discipline; you can switch defensive schemes and stop playing favorites.

"For fans who have been more peeved by the way the team has been run than by its 70-90 mark in the 2000s, the last two weeks have been encouraging. But it's the next two years that matter."

If I weren't too tied up (or too time-inefficient) this weekend I might have posted the same story almost word-for-word to highlight my lingering doubt about Danny Snyder.

For all the encouraging start of the Dannyhan era, I'm skeptical. We've seen good starts twice before from Danny when he hired true NFL professionals to run the Redskins. First in 2001 when he signed Marty Schottenheimer and next on that glorious day in 2004 when Joe Gibbs returned.

But it's not how Danny starts. It's how Danny finishes.

Snyder finished with Schottenheimer after a single season when Marty declined to amend his contract to allow Snyder more voice in running the team.

Joe Gibbs needed two seasons to get something going with the Redskins. We looked to Gibbs to tame the Snyder beast. Instead, he succumbed to it with an orgy of bad trades and roster decisions that led to the disastrous 2006 season.

Washington was unusually quiet in the 2007 offseason, just like now.

The test of the Shanahan-Allen-Snyder partnership isn't this year when the Danny is keeping his head down. The test will come later when things get very good or very very bad.

After a good '05 season, Snyder's roster excesses tanked the2006 season. During a bad start in '09, Snyderrato did everything they could do to push an 8-8 team to a four win season. They weren't trying to do that. They just couldn't help themselves.

Rather than come forward to provide cover for his coach and de facto GM as they tried to get their act together, the Danny went deeper under cover. The 2009 season reflected the guy at the top. Well, Jim Zorn and Vinny Cerrato are gone, but Snyder is still here.

Do NOT get me wrong. I remain a diehard Redskin fan. I'll always hope for the best for this team whomever is coaching it or is on the roster. Allen and Shanahan are off to a good start. I just don't think Snyder earned the right to a direct transfer of my family treasure for every game, including exhibition games, at full price.

StubHub and Ticketmaster are better choices. I can pick and choose my games through third-parties and not get my hands dirty with Snyder. Even if I pay a premium per seat per game, the outlay is a lot less than $2600 for my season ticket package. I can buy a big screen HDTV for that kind of money, not that I can afford one in these times.

The Redskins produce a muddled-won-loss record over the decade and remain the most profitable team in the NFL. That has to stop.We, not the Danny, own the Washington Redskins. Just because Snyder owns the franchise rights to sell us tickets doesn't mean he can run the team any way he wants. These old line sports teams don't get customer loyalty. They get fan allegiance. We're talking public trust here. Grossly violated trust.

So, I'll wait for Dannyhan to produce results. I'll hope for the best, cheer loudly and sit on my wallet until I see wins.

It feels like Daniel Snyder has died and gone to Chicago. All is quiet around the Washington Redskins. All of the buzz is in Chicagoland where the Bears locked up free agent defensive end Julius Peppers and running back Chester Taylor on 2010 NFL Free Agency, Day One.

The Redskins will be pursuing running backs after dumping practically every rusher on the roster except Clinton Portis and Anthony Alridge. Yet, the Skins weren't in the hunt for Taylor.Norv Turner locked up running back Darren Sproles for the Chargers before Washington could text his agent. Not that Norv is, you know, holding grudges or anything against his old team.

But Peppers was a surprise. He was widely touted as the No. 1 free agent choice by the Redskins and several other teams. Washington was rumored throughout the day to be in a bidding war with the Bears for his services. That rumor may have been started by Peppers' agent. I think you get sued by your free agent clients if you don't name drop "Daniel Snyder" sometime.

But the Bears managed to steal a player from Snyder for the second time in less than a year. Chicago out-bid Snyderrato for quarterback Jake Cutler last Spring.

Daniel Snyder can't possibly be here. He must be in Chicago.

USAToday points out that Peppers has the third most sacks (81) since 2002, after Jason Taylor (88) and Dwight Freeney (84). Taylor, of course was misused here in 2008 following an ill-advised trade with Miami. Snyder planned to pursue Freeney if he became a free agent in 2007. The Colts slapped a franchise tag on Freeney before negotiating a long-term contract with him.

The Freeney moved worked for the Colts. The Taylor move did not work for the Redskins and would not have even if Taylor hadn't suffered a medical problem with his calf. The Skins weren't going to use Taylor the way the Dolphins did. So they weren't going to get the same performance.

Chicago's big moves won't be any more successful for them than the Danny's were for the Redskins. Not this year, anyway. Not because the players are bad. But because it's football, the most team-oriented of all sports. It takes a season to jell with a new team.

Jay Cutler can vouch for that.

The Washington Redskins made the opening moves of the 2010 free agent season today.

From Redskins.com:

"Gone are backup quarterback Todd Collins, receiver Antwaan Randle El, guard Randy Thomas, kick returner Rock Cartwright, cornerback Fred Smoot, running back Ladell Betts and defensive tackle Cornelius Griffin. Their contracts were terminated.

"Also exiting via waivers: Running back Marcus Mason, fullback Eddie Williams and defensive end J.D. Skolnitsky."

Todd Collins never got the shot to start that he deserved when he followed Al Saunders to the Redskins in 2006. Collins had the best grip on Saunders' complex offensive schemes. He gave fans the first real inkling of what Saunders offense might have been when he stepped in for an injured Jason Campbell late in the 2007 season to lead Washington's four game charge to the playoffs.

Joe Gibbs stuck with Mark Brunell in 2006 instead of Collins, one of several blunders made by the legendary coach that year. Gibbs hatched a plan to use Collins as the in-game back-up to Brunell, but would elevate Jason Campbell to No. 2 if Campbell had a week of practice snaps with the first team offense. (I just wrote that and I'm still confused.)

Local fans hoped for the best for Marcus Mason. But he failed to catch on with the Raven or the Jets, teams he spent time with after Washington cut him. The Redskins brought him back after season ending injuries to Clinton Portis and Ladell Betts. Jim Zorn was more impressed with Quinton Ganther. Mike Shanahan evidently feels the same.

I expected to see Colt Brennan on this list, but he's hanging in there. Maybe Shanahan will give him a shot.

The Redskins tendered contracts to Jason Campbell, Carlos Rogers and Rocky McIntosh.

If you believe, as I do, that Campbell and Rogers are trade bait, then look for Washington to gauge interest in those players. It's unlikely any team will pony up a first and third round draft pick for either of them, but Washington could sign them to new contracts and trade them for lesser offers.

A move like that won't surprise me for Rogers. Campbell may be in limbo until the Skins see whether Sam Bradford will fall to them in the Draft.

Perhaps the Washington Redskins should have kept their interest in potential free agent running back Darren Sproles quiet. The San Diego Chargers had second thoughts about allowing the jitterbug running back to become a free agent. So they tendered him a $7 million contract that will cost another team a first and third round draft picks to sign him.

We know player's agents will drop the name "Dan Snyder" when angling for a pay raise for their clients. But when the Redskins have a real interest in a free agent, they won't let the clock slip past 12:01 A.M. to sign their guy.

Now, it could be that Norv Turner just wanted to spite Snyder, his former boss. But it's more likely that the Chargers remembered what happened when they let Michael Turner walk out the door in 2008.

Turner "the Burner" rushed for 1699 yards and 17 touchdowns for the Atlanta Falcons who finished 11-5.The Chargers languished at 8-8.

That's OK, Redskins fans. DE Julius Peppers is still out there and Dannyhan is said to be drooling over him.

Expect big news by the time you wake up tomorrow.

Any notion that it would be a dull week at Redskins Park went up in smoke with two pieces of news.

Washington's Pro Bowl left tackle Chris Samuels will announce his retirement from football later this week according to a story by The Washington Post and picked up by USAToday.

Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford showed up at the NFL Combine in buff condition and could move to the top of the draft order.

Samuels suffered a neck injury in an October game against Carolina that knocked him out for the season. Soon after, we learned that Samuels is also afflicted with stenosis, a narrowing of the spine that may add pressure to the spinal cord.

Samuels consulted a number of specialists about continuing his NFL career but has come to accept that he risks paralysis by doing so. The Redskins concluded last fall that Samuels playing days were over according to Jason Reid's Redskins Insider post today.That news is becoming public now because the Skins respected Samuels wish for privacy as he grappled with the decision.

Samuels is one of the better first round draft picks in Redskins history. He wasthe third overall pick of the 2000 Draft supervised by Charley Casserly and Norv Turner. Named to six NFL Pro Bowls, Samuels is the only lineman this decade who might have started for the original Hogs O-line of the Gibbs I era.

Jack Gorman's Bleacher Report story Sam Bradford's Weight Shakes Up The Top Five shakes up my guesswork of how the Skins will play the Draft.

Bradford weighed in at 236 pounds hinting that he could have the ruggedness to stand up the pro pass rushers. There was a concern about his weight as a college player. As a result, Bradford could go all Matthew Stafford on us to become the top selection in the upcoming Draft.

The St. Louis Rams, who own the top pick, need a quarterback more than Washington does.

For fans who want to see the Redskins dump Jason Campbell, Bradford is at the top of the wish list. I'm not one of those fans, but have harbored a deep suspicion of Washington's commitment to Jason.So I took Mike Shanahan's announcement that the team would tender a contract offer to Campbell as the first move to entice trade offers for his services.

GM Bruce Allen must have thought through his options with Samuels retiring and Bradford moving up the draft chart. Wouldn't it be ironic if the new GM duplicated the move of the team's last real GM (Casserly) and selected a left tackle in the first round of the draft?

When Hog Heaven was hosted by MVN, I used to produce a functional system of ranking draft prospects that was used network-wide, primarily as a resource that bloggers could link to when touting one prospect or degrading another.

That, along with the statistics I use, are pretty much the extent of my credibility for ranking quarterbacks.  People will listen to me if I'm right.  People will not listen to me if I'm wrong.  My rankings will vary from the Kiper's and McShay's of the world for that reason.

I also get the opportunity to adjust the rankings specific to the Redskins situation.  This might make a difference at the top of this list.  The strongest prospect at the quarterback position in the draft might be Jimmy Clausen, who has 34 college starts and a 62.5% completion percentage.  But when you evaluate guys who might succeed in the Redskins system, those aren't universally successful numbers, and Mike Shanahan's system values mobility and accuracy.  Jimmy Clausen's 6.72% sack rate is also troubling for me.  When evaluating a guy who projects as a higher varient Patrick Ramsey or Jason Campbell, you don't want to degrade the prospect, but rather suggest that until the team changes the way it does business, they have limited use for a guy whose development curve resembles the last two guys who have failed to develop.

Anyway, I'll rank, then you can complain, and I'll try to defend myself.

1.  Colt McCoy, Texas

I can break it down 100 different ways, make spreadsheets, sort data, flip the spreadsheets upside down (9s become 6s), and I can't make McCoy and Sam Bradford look like appreciably different players.  They are both first round talents.  Bradford's arm is better, but McCoy' isn't bad.  McCoy threw a lot of passes these last two seasons, and his team kept winning games.

A good comparable for him would be Chad Pennington, the #20 pick in the 2000 draft.  Pennington might not have gone that high if there had been stronger quarterback prospects in that draft, like there are in this one, and he might have been pushed to the second round.  That wouldn't change the fact that Pennington has had one of the better careers in the history of the position (Pennington, the career completion percentage leader in the NFL, sits at 28th on a list of all-time quarterbacks im putting together).

Like with Bradford (and Pennington), durability is a concern with McCoy, but he didn't miss but one start at Texas (Kansas State, as a Freshman).  Particularly with McCoy, above all others, it's Mike Shanahan's system that will allow Colt McCoy to make plays down the field by getting him outside the pocket at cutting the field in half, defining throws on those deep crossing routes and comeback staples.

McCoy's biggest weakness, particularly when it comes to using a top 20 pick on him, is that if you change the system to a system that isn't timing based, you may have to replace him.  Which puts you right back at this spot in three or four seasons, if Kyle Shanahan takes a head coaching job elsewhere.

2. Sam Bradford, Oklahoma

I have Bradford at second on this list, and he's lower than McCoy for a single reason.  Colt McCoy has 53 college starts.  Sam Bradford has 31 college starts.  Both players have started in a national championship game, although neither really boosted their stock in one.  Both players have rare accuracy throwing the football, and they can both make a play with their legs.

Bradford is a little better at downfield route combinations from the pocket than Colt McCoy is.  If McCoy is a Chad Pennington type, Bradford's best comparable would have to be Houston's Matt Schaub.  One of the reasons I feel that the Redskins will take Sam Bradford if he is available is because of Mike Shanahan's son, Kyle, at the offensive coordinator position.  Kyle spent last season calling plays that made Matt Schaub the NFL's leading passer.  Under the Shanahan's there's little doubt that Sam Bradford could become a 4,000 yard passer for the Redskins.

But lets go one step further with the Schaub analogy.  Let's say that we could predict ahead of time that Bradford was an identical prospect to Schaub.  Is that the kind of player you would draft at the 4th overall pick?  On one hand, you're getting a top ten quarterback in this system four years down the road.  On the other hand, you might be able to generate more immediate dividends by addressing a real issue at No. 4 overall, and taking McCoy in the second round.  After all, Pennington had more career value at age 29 than Schaub did, but despite adding great age 30 and age 32 seasons, it looks like Schaub has a chance to finish out his career with better seasons than injury riddled Pennington.

However, if the difference between Bradford and McCoy is that ultimately, Bradford has the better projection for seasons after 2015, is that enough net present value to justify taking Bradford 20-30 picks ahead of McCoy?  Because my rankings system grades prospects only on their value to the contract they will sign for being drafted, that's a question that you have to decide for themselves.  We have a pair of guys who can be 3,500-4,000 yard passers from 2011-2014.  After that, McCoy might have maxed out his value while Bradford can excel with the more talent you give him.  The question is: is the use of the 4th overall pick now worth the potential upside in 2015?  And it's a yes or no, not a maybe.

Bradford is very, very overvalued nationally.  But that doesn't mean he's not the best quarterback in this class.  It just means that it's closer at the top of the class than a lot of people really think.

3. Jimmy Clausen, Notre Dame

I feel pretty confident in saying that Clausen will not be a player under serious consideration for the Redskins at No. 4, but if he gets by Denver at No. 11, he could freefall to a point where the Redskins could make a play on him by trading up back into the first round.  And so it's critical to make a determination whether this team will be better off in the long run with Jimmy Clausen or Colt McCoy as the QB of the future.  The Redskins might have a shot at either.

It's a different argument once the Redskins have grabbed a franchise tackle at No. 4.  At this point, the argument that the Redskins have absoutely nothing to work with for the rookie will be mostly bunk.  With Russ Okung (or Anthony Davis) anchoring the left side of the line, it makes sense for the Redskins to try to get someone in there to develop a relationship with those receivers.  With Jason Campbell still on the roster for at least one more year, there's actually a good argument to drafting Clausen late in the first round if he falls there.  Clausen is more similar to Campbell than to any other QB in the NFL based on college stats (other similar QBs include Matt Leinart, Ben Roethlisberger, and Aaron Rodgers).  All of these quarterbacks fall heavily on the McNabb side of the Cutler-McNabb interception to sack "bad result" continuum.

Clausen is very short and lacks a refined sense of the pocket, which are weaknesses he shares with McCoy.  His release is long, in that it takes him a long time from decision to release, but it's fundamentally sound.  He will protect the football in the pocket.  He generally makes good decisions down the field.  And ultimately, Clausen's success or failure in the NFL will be determined by whether or not his team puts a lot of talent around him.  If they take Okung AND Clausen this year, the Redskins might want to consider taking an elite receiver in the 2011 draft.  When you look at Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas, these are not guys who will help turn Jimmy Clausen into a pro bowl quarterback.  Dez Bryant or even Golden Tate...those guys might.

4. Zac Robinson, Oklahoma State

I have a second round grade on Zac Robinson.  A lot of his strengths, though, would be limited in the Mike Shanahan offensive system.  Robinson is strong in this draft class for a very quick release, phenominal pocket presence, and excellent downfield passing ability.  He had the opportunity to play games on film without the benefit of all-world receiver Dez Bryant, and the OSU offense did not lose it's downfield element.  Robinson is quite accurate downfield.  He is neither a better, nor a worse prospect than Jason Campbell was coming out of Auburn, but he has pretty much the opposite skill set.

Robinson is mobile, but he's not as accurate outside of the pocket.  His NFL comparable from the last few years would be someone like a Matt Ryan.  Obviously, Ryan came with a level of accomplishment that Robinson does not come with, which is why one was the 3rd overall pick and the other is a mid-round draft projection.  Robinson is a guy with very limited weaknesses, and should play well in a pro-style offense.  He lacks rare skills or great fan fare, but what skills he does have are franchise quarterback caliber.  He's a gunslinger who might turn the ball over, but hey, you've got a better chance of getting the next Favre here than with Bradford or Clausen.

5. Dan Lefevour, Central Michigan

I've seen the Pennington comparable used before for Dan Lefevour, but the guy I think he compares best to in the last few drafts would have to be Brady Quinn.  Lefevour is not a naturally accurate passer, and his 66.7% completion percentage is largely a function of playing against MAC defenses in a superior offense.  His college production, however, is undeniable.  Lefevour is a vertical passer with mobility and a good sense of a professional pocket for a spread quarterback.  And when you're talking about the safest picks in this QB class, Lefevour received my lowest (best) "Varience" calculation, which measures his value in terms of consistent production from year to year.  He improved from his freshman year to his sophomore year, then leveled off and was pretty much a machine from that point out.

Quinn's struggles with the Browns suggest that taking a guy in the first round and then not giving him any help will not offer Lefevour a chance to be successful, but if a team like the Giants wants a backup to Eli Manning, Lefevour would be a great pick in the third round.

6. Tony Pike, Cincinnati

Pike's projection ranges anywhere from Joe Flacco to Tom Brady.  With that said, keep in mind that a Brady projection would imply a 6th round pick with the skills to be an elite player, but who needs a significant amount of development in a very short amount of time to have any shot at realizing that potential.  Brady was a super bowl winner at age 24, Pike will be a 23 year old rookie.  That's not very much time to develop enough sense of an NFL playbook to be playable within a year.  Brady did it, but that doesn't mean it's likely to be done again.

Flacco on the other hand is a better projection.  If you have to play Pike right away, and he can be a downfield passer who completes 62% of his passes for more than 7 yards per attempt, that's a fringe franchise quarterback.  Which is where Pike projects at: third round, and the first two or three years of his career will be particularly critical.  If he's not a markedly better NFL QB by 2012, he's probably a career backup.

7. Tim Tebow, Florida

Tebow's going to be heavily criticized no matter where he goes in his career, but what you're essentially dealing with here is a guy who is virtually guarenteed to enjoy one of the weirdest career paths in NFL history.  There's a good chance that Tebow will start and finish his career at quarterback, but I get the feeling that eventually, someone is going to try him at another position to get him on the field and jump start ticket sales.

As such, there are few Tebow comparables in NFL history, but I offer you up one really, really good one: Daunte Culpepper.  Culpepper has essentially had two different NFL careers, neatly separated by a gruesome knee injury that may not have had anything to do with his decline as a player.  Culpepper played five seasons with Randy Moss on the outside for him, started 73 games, made three pro bowls, threw 129 TDs and 74 INTs (including a 18-23 season), had a QB rating above 95.0 3 times, and might have been the NFLs best QB over that timeframe.  In 5 seasons since, Culpepper has throw 20 TDs, 32 INTs, and has never had a QB rating over 78.0, starting just 24 games.

The only way that this applies to Tebow's career is that he can both bust, and make a pro bowl, and hardly anyone would be surprised (or wrong).  As a ridiculously high-effiency college player, Tebow's efficiency will translate to the next level if coaches embraces principles of the spread offense as well as give him the superior talent advantage he enjoyed at Florida.

In other words, build a winning team, and Tebow will seem right at home, without missing a beat.  Bring him to a loser, and the flaws will be amplified.

8. Mike Kafka, Northwestern

This is higher than I would normally rank a player with 637 career passing attempts, and more career INTs than TDs, but Kafka played in a terrible offensive environment (the Big Ten) on a terrible offensive team (the NU Wildcats), and managed to win 11 of his 19 starts while posting a bunch of 300 yard passing games throwing to receivers who are either at NU on academic scolarships, or lost their QB battles to Kafka, but can still catch passes from him as a consolation.

Kafka was a pro-style QB executing a college offense and playing through injury because he was just so much better than anyone else that Northwestern had.  And he was instrumental in an upset of the 9-0 Iowa Hawkeyes.  He somehow managed to complete 64% of his college passes, and his obscenely low TD rate (3.0%) would look a lot better if we were allowed to count Kafka rushing TDs.  The guy can flat out produce, and should have a longer run in the NFL than his predecessor at NU, Brett Basenez.

9. Jarrett Brown, West Virginia

For a quarterback who spent his first four seasons waiting behind Pat White for an opportunity to play, Jarrett Brown is a guy who can really throw the football.  He's not a great prospect, but down at the bottom end of the fourth round where Brown is projected to go, I think you'd be better off with his arm as a developmental project and backup QB than you would with Jevan Snead.  Brown has mechanical flaws when he has to reset, and you will have to iron out his footwork to get him to the next level, but Brown comes equipped with all the NFL tools.

10. Max Hall, BYU

Hall's numbers are a lot better than John Beck's numbers were coming out of BYU three years ago, but BYU is a powerhouse in the mountain west, and Hall spent two years throwing to Austin Collie, among others.

Hall is a higher efficiency player than Beck, but he also throws more questionable passes.  He's still going to be hurt by Beck being overdrafted by the Dolphins in 2007, as he's looking at a 5th or 6th round selection.  As far as the Shanahan offense goes, Hall could be an intriging look that late in the draft.  He lacks the phyisical tools of a Jevan Snead-type, but he's both quicker and more accurate with his decisions, and is a Senior with 39 career starts compared to a Junior with 27 career starts.  The safe conclusion: Hall is better.

Top Washington Redskins draft prospect Sam Bradford will attend the NFL Combine but will not participate in throwing drills according to a story on NFL.com.

The former Oklahoma quarterback sprained his ACL in the first game of the 2009 season and re-injured his shoulder in an October game against Texas. He missed the rest of the season after shoulder surgery.

Bradford's throwing motion is not quite at his best, but his surgeon, the highly regarded Dr. James Andrews, says Bradford's recovery is ahead of schedule.

Former Notre Dame quarterback Jimmy Clausen is recovering from toe surgery and is not ready to throw at the Combine. Like Bradford, he will participate in interviews and medical exams.

Both players will throw at their Pro Days when NFL scouts visit them on campus.

The smart money says that Washington's Mike Shanahan will jump at Bradford, but I'm not so sure. In Daniel Snyder's reign or error, the Redskins have never had both a head coach of stature and a legitimate general manager at the same time (well, a legit GM never). Shanahan and Bruce Allen are wild cards. We don't know what they are thinking.

Using Washington's first round pick on a quarterback depends on Shanahan's assessment of Jason Campbell and on Campbell's trade value.

Yes, Campbell indeed has trade value, though not the first and third round picks for a high tender veteran. There's nothing that prevents the Redskins from accepting offers of multiple lesser picks for Campbell to give Allen more to work with to restock talent. A predraft trade of Campbell would suggest that the Skins will pick a quarterback in the first round.

But Campbell on the roster may mean the Skins will be open to trading down from their draft pick. The four teams selecting after Washington need a franchise quarterback and both the Seattle Seahawks and Cleveland Browns are interested in Bradford.

Offers for multiple high draft picks by those teams should intrigue Allen. If he can bring enough high calibre talent to the team, Shanahan may be enticed to work with Campbell for another year, especially if that new talent is on the offensive line.

Adding too many first and second rounders ordinarily means huge cap hits. That's not a consideration this season with the No Salary Cap provisions of the CBA sure to kick in on March 5.

It's Daniel Snyder's dream scenario and this time he may have the brain trust to make good use of it.

Point After: Quarterbacks work out at the Combine Sunday, but offensive linemen start their drills today. Tackles Russell Okung (OK State), Bryan Bulaga (Iowa) and Trent Williams (Oklahoma) are projected first round picks. So they are the guys to watch today.

Colt Brennan has become the forgotten man in quarterback discussions.

Our colleague at DC Pro Sports Report posted on Jason Campbell vs Sam Bradford. Go take a look. We'll be here when you get back.

A cliche I've cited in this space before is that "points come out of the passing game."

Passing off cliches as analysis is often problematic and unbecoming of an analysis section like that at Hog Heaven.  But in this case, I'm citing the cliche as a counter argument to value metrics that suggest that the Redskins passing offense has been at or near the average for the last five seasons.  That's four different playcallers for three different quarterbacks and under two head coaches, each player, playcaller, and head coach finishing "in the black" in terms of passing game value.

But the Redskins really do not score.  It was under Al Saunders where their point total best matched their yardage production, but even then, Saunders' system was dependant on the running game to generate those points. The question about point production should be answered.  And so, if points do in fact come out of the passing game, is an offense that underacheives it's yardage production in points in need of an upgrade in the passing game?

The argument is a bit simplistic for my tastes.  The Redskins do not need an upgrade in the passing game anymore than they need one in the running game, or in defending the pass.  However, there's an element here of talent: the Redskins might not be getting everything out of their talent in the pass defense, and they might not be getting what they can out of the running game.  It's hard to argue though, that with all the focus on it in the last three years, that there's anything more to squeeze out of the talent in the Redskins passing game then they've already gotten.

And additionally, maybe there's something to the fact that the Redskins can't seem to score.  The one constant over the last two years for the Redskins has been an absence of big plays, especially against above average defenses.  Red zone play was a concern in 2008, but in 2009 the Redskins changed up the playcaller and scored in the red zone at an above league average rate.  The reasons the Redskins consistently fail to score points is because they struggled to get into the red zone in 2009, and they have been notoriously bad at scoring from 30+ yards away since 2007.  This is, at the very least, as much the fault of the passing attack as the running attack, and it's probably much more a lack of offensive punch than anything.  The Redskins lack big play offensive players.  And without those big plays, the Redskins make scoring points a lot harder than it should be--and they make it look a lot worse than it actually is (which, yeah, is already harder than it should be).

So the question becomes: how can the Redskins improve their passing game?  To do this, they have to find a way to add an explosive player to the lineup, and they have to do it without losing some of their more dependable players, or disrupting the delicate balance that has kept the Redskins competitve beyond the point at which they probably should have been.

In my opinion, the worst solution is also the most popular: to start over from scratch.  When you consider that the Redskins have no above average players except for a pair of tight ends and possibly a quarterback, starting over seems like it wouldn't be too much work.  The problem is, it's not realistic.  There are players who were drafted within the last two years who are still incredibly cheap and worth at least giving a shot in this offense before making a decision, as well as players (like Derrick Dockery) who have many cheap years of contract remaining.  A complete rebuild would involve a dumping of those veterans.  The other big point here is that prior to the 2006 CBA negotiation, there was a legitimate cap doomsday scenario where the Redskins would have to start over from scratch with the back half of the roster: 20 or more rookies.  Essentially, this is the alternative to building on what the Redskins have on the roster already: free agents, draft picks, and undrafted free agents.

A much better solution is to try to turnover all the replacement level players and sub-replacement fodder as quickly as possible.  This involves ousting the Levi Joneses, Casey Rabachs, Will Montgomerys, Mike Williams, on the offensive line while moving Santana Moss, Antwaan Randle El, and making those tough decisions at the running back position that opens up some roster spots to bring in some younger talents.  The improvement, by this method, should be instataneously visable, but it comes with it's own set of problems: good teams are build around great players and players who complement those great players.  But this method says nothing about adding actual talent to the passing game, rather, it centers around getting rid of the non-contributors.  This solution will not get you where you want your offense to be.  The Chargers, the Colts, the Patriots: those teams did not get where they are by simply smoothing over the bumps and holes on their offense and hoping for the best.  They got where they are by pairing great players with great players and then filling out the rest of the team with contributors and backing up the contributors with younger contributors.

The only constant that Mike Shanahan ever had in terms of greatness on his roster was a consistently strong offensive line: Matt Lepsis, Tom Nalen, Dan Neil...then Ryan Harris, Chris Kuper, and Ryan Clady.  The Broncos won with a back-end of career John Elway, and a very young, mistake-prone Jay Cutler.  Shanahan won with Jake Plummer, and he won with Brian Griese.  The offensive line was the constant, and the running back play was the varient.  Some backs produced top rushing units: Mike Anderson, Terrell Davis, and Clinton Portis.  Others were merely the best guys for the job in a given year: Olandis Gary and Tatum Bell fall in this category.  Rod Smith was the best receiver that Shanahan ever coached, with Ed McCaffrey as a close second.

To improve the passing game and to score points, the Redskins need to add a quality NFL player to the lineup at a few different levels.  The "prospects" on the offensive end of the roster are limited to three guys: interior lineman Edwin Williams and Chad Rinehart, and WR Marko Mitchell.  Here's my plan: a controlled, structured rebuild.  Instead of tearing down the parts of the passing game that were a positive under Jim Zorn, which is that the Redskins passing game was highly efficient at generating yards after the catch, the Redskins should be focused on adding a quality route runner to the receiver rotation who can replace the big play ability of Santana Moss while offering the ability to stay healthy for a whole season.  With this player the Redskins should focus on acquiring either one or two lineman who can develop into near-pro bowl level players by their second season (for a first round pick) or third season (for a second round pick).  Keep the players who have been good after the catch: Cooley, Fred Davis, Devin Thomas, maybe even Ladell Betts, and add a big play guy, as well as a tackle who can help buy the time it takes to generate a big play.

Even with regard to the passing game, it appears that the quarterback of the Washington Redskins will not be a huge determinant of the offensive efficiency this team will feature in this upcoming season.  When the team does choose to address the quarterback position, it should be mindful that the selection is being made because, eventually, Mike Shanahan's offense is going to be run through a veteran quarterback.  What the team has to determine is whether the right guy is available in this draft as opposed to next years draft or the 2012 draft.  If it's determined that a big name player like Sam Bradford or Colt McCoy is the guy to lead the Redskins offense into the future, there is a benefit to adding the player now: he's not going to be new to the system when he is needed under center.  There's also growing suspicion that if the Redskins make it through the first round without taking a QB, they will be waiting until the fourth or fifth round to draft a developmental prospect.  This suggets that the Redskins aren't enamored with any of the guys who figure to be taken in the top two rounds, but would still be willing to pull the trigger if the value is right.

A restructured rebuild is tough to pull off in one season.  Basically, to have a great offense in 2010, the Redskins will require a lot of luck, by which I mean they would have to get a contribution from some of those late round and UDFA Cerrato pickups who become some of the more productive players in Shanahan's system.  This would be deemed "luck" over "good drafting" because for ths system to change so early into a player's career usually means that a player is starting over fresh.  It would be unexpected to get significant contributon from either Rinehart or Edwin Williams this year, although Marko Mitchell figures to be in the wide receiver rotation.

But my plan is a lot easier to execute if the new team leadership is patient with the younger players of the prior regeme.  It's possible that all Jason Campbell, Devin Thomas, and Malcolm Kelly are merely just average players who just serve to keep seats warm until their contracts expire and then younger prospects take over for them.  But it also makes it much easier to address needs such as rebuilding the offensive line into a strength if the team is patient with letting these guys play out their contracts.  The key is to not overreact in a spike in the production of average players that occurs due to unit-wide improvement.  The other key is to not block your prospects.  This is how teams get "lucky" in the late rounds with talent.  If there's a role in the offense for a draft pick to play, you're giving your draft class a lot more chances to succeed than the team that is trying to force these late round players into special teams roles.

It's the "Plan C" of team building.  Staying the course wouldn't be a terrible thing, but it would require investments in the running game and pass defense to exceed expectations.  Tearing it all down now could put the Redskins in a situation similar to Oakland or Buffalo.  But a structured rebuild would allow the unit to make small strides based on where they already are, without having to worry about being a special team by November.  And the patience shown, I believe, would not interfere with the aggression necessary to create a top level Redskins offense over the next season or two.

There are only two seasons in the year: Football Season and Waiting For Football Season. The wait began this year at the end of the Super Bowl due to the NFL's experiment of making the Pro Bowl the prequal to the big event.

Our thirst for anything football will be quenched in a small way this week with the start of the NFL Combine. Leave it to the NFL to milk repetitive skill drills into a cable TV marathon with Mel Kiper and others reporting who helped or hurt themselves with the Draft.

Here are some key dates for pro football lovers:

Feb. 24-Mar. 2 -- NFL Scouting Combine

Feb. 25 -- Deadline for designating franchise players.

Mar. 4-Apr. 1 -- Pro Day Workouts, on-campus tryouts for athletes not invited to the NFL Combine. NFL.com has the schedule by date and campus.

March 5 -- Free agency begins. If a new labor agreement is not in place by this date, there will be no cap on player salaries, but severe restrictions on free agent movement by players. Teams must tender a salary offer to Restricted Free Agents on their roster to preserve their right to match offers from other teams.

March 21-24 -- Annual owners meeting

Early April -- 2010 regular season schedule announced

April 22-24 -- 2010 NFL Draft, because we all need a third day of Draft coverage.

July 22 -- Deadline for franchise players to sign new contracts

Aug. 7 -- Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony, Canton, Ohio. Big day for Russ Grimm. Who's going to Canton?

Aug. 8 -- Hall of Fame Game

Aug. 31-- Roster cutdown to maximum of 75 players

Sept. 4-- Roster cutdown to maximum of 53 players

Sept. 9-13 -- 2010 Kickoff Weekend

Oct. 19 -- Trading deadline

Nov. 16 -- Signing deadline for franchise players

2011

Jan. 2 -- Regular season ends.

Jan. 8-9 -- Wild Card Weekend.

Jan. 15-16 -- Divisional Playoffs.

Jan. 23 -- Conference Championships.

Feb. 6 -- Super Bowl XLIV, North Texas. Where will you be and who will you cheer for on this day.

Early February -- Pro Bowl, Honolulu, Hawaii

Point After

I'm waiting to see if Danny Snyder is attending the NFL Combine this week. I'll take it as a bad sign if he is anywhere near Indianapolis.

Why do I get the feeling that the Washington Redskins will not designate any 2010 franchise players? The official team web site lists Redskin free agents. None are franchise quality.

The Redskins have five draft picks remaining for 2010 (Rounds 1,2,4,5,7). The Skins used its third round pick on DE Jeremy Jarmon in last year's Supplemental Draft. Jarmon is still growing up in the NFL, but no argument here on the use of the pick. The heartburn comes from the loss of the sixth round pick for trade for Miami Dolphin DE Jason Taylor.

Taylor suffered a freak medical condition in his calf in 2008 that kept him sidelined most of the season. Demetric Evans started 11 games in Taylor's place to produce 33 tackles and 3.5 sacks. Combined with 3.5 sacks made by Taylor when he played, Washington got good production from the left defensive end position.

The Skins misused Taylor and cut him when he declined to report for offseason workouts that were not part of his contract. Now both he and Washington's sixth round pick are in Miami. The presence of both DE/LB Brian Orakpo and Jarmon take the sting out of that.

Of all the wheeling and dealing that will go over thenext month, you won't hear many that involve future draft picks. If the NFL owners and players don't extend the Collective Bargaining Agreement by March 2011, there will be no 2011 NFL Draft. How do you place a value on a pick in a draft that might not happen?