Would Skins trade up for Bradford?

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:25 pm

A safety is the LAST thing that we need.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:50 pm

Not sure, Canes, what your point is, but have you not seen my comments regarding what we SHOULD take?

My only point in here is, if the talent doesn't match the pick...

YOU DO NOT REACH.

Especially in the top 5.

Of course, it appears that you disagree...

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 1:11 am

Countertrey wrote:Not sure, Canes, what your point is, but have you not seen my comments regarding what we SHOULD take?

My only point in here is, if the talent doesn't match the pick...

YOU DO NOT REACH.

Especially in the top 5.

Of course, it appears that you disagree...

I wasn't trying to comment directly on your post, just making a general statement that safety is very low on our list of needs right now.

Regarding what you said, I agree 100% that you don't reach.

With this draft, it's pretty clear that there will at least be comparable, if not better talent, available at a position of need when we pick at #4.

As for the safety position, I think that some people on this board overrate the position. Yes, it's important, but using another top 10 pick on a safety would be insane. This pick, unless the talent doesn't match, should be used for an offensive player. If, for some reason, we do decide to take a defensive player, I would much rather have Haden than Berry. I'd take a top corner over a top safety every time.

SKINFAN · Post by **SKINFAN** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 11:27 am

frankcal20 wrote:Our Defense isn't a problem. It's the offense that can't put points on the board. Now the defense gave up the leads several times but that was only after the offense either turned the ball over or went 3 and out.

Defense IS a problem, but OFFENSE IS the BIGGER PROBLEM. LoL, we have problems....

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:44 pm

Countertrey wrote:Fortunately, it appears that no matter how things break down this year, there will probably be a top 5 or 6 player at a position of need available.

Isn't it cool we have so many needs!

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:53 pm

CanesSkins26 wrote:
Countertrey wrote:Not sure, Canes, what your point is, but have you not seen my comments regarding what we SHOULD take?

My only point in here is, if the talent doesn't match the pick...

YOU DO NOT REACH.

Especially in the top 5.

Of course, it appears that you disagree...

I wasn't trying to comment directly on your post, just making a general statement that safety is very low on our list of needs right now.
Regarding what you said, I agree 100% that you don't reach.

With this draft, it's pretty clear that there will at least be comparable, if not better talent, available at a position of need when we pick at #4.

As for the safety position, I think that some people on this board overrate the position. Yes, it's important, but using another top 10 pick on a safety would be insane. This pick, unless the talent doesn't match, should be used for an offensive player. If, for some reason, we do decide to take a defensive player, I would much rather have Haden than Berry. I'd take a top corner over a top safety every time.

Got it... we're good!

Gibbs4Life · Post by **Gibbs4Life** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 3:32 pm

How bout our 2011 #1 and Jason Campbell for the Rams #1

Then we take Bradford and Okung

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:06 pm

Nobody is giving up the #1 pick in the draft or making that deal for Jason Campbell - that is certifiably insane :shock:

We are not giving up draft picks we are trying to get them - we are many players from being having a consistently competitive product on the field

we now have guys in charge that will re-build this franchise and I would expect that they are hoping to get close to what they need by the end of 2011 and the middle of 2012, at the earliest - I would not expect them to do that at the expense of giving up draft picks and especially not first round draft picks

we are in pretty good shape at the 4 pick - if they really like Bradford and he's there we take him - If he's not then almost certainly we take Okung
I hope they stay the course and see what happens between now and draft day - the longer this process goes on, the better result for this franchise IMO

Gibbs4Life · Post by **Gibbs4Life** » Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:23 am

If he's not then almost certainly we take Okung

The Kipe says if Bradford goes #1 we are going Jimmy Clausen

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Fri Mar 05, 2010 1:58 am

PulpExposure wrote:Uh no thank you. Please no thank you.

I like Bradford at 4. I don't like having to give up MORE for him to get him.

If Bradford goes 1, pick Okung. Pretty easy.

I agree. Going to one is too heavy a price. If he is there at four, take him; otherwise we have a serious need at OL that can be filled. This is a no brainer.

Manchester_Redskin · Post by **Manchester_Redskin** » Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:11 am

I can see us taking Clausen at 4 , if we sign Clifton.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Fri Mar 05, 2010 9:04 am

Manchester_Redskin wrote:I can see us taking Clausen at 4, if we sign Clifton.

sorry, but why is that a caveat?

The only way they are taking Claussen is if Bradford AND Okung are already gone AND if they think Claussen can be a really good QB

the make up of the offense is going to be very fluid here over the next 2 years and I think it's been fairly clear that Allen and Shanaha are going to do everything they can to re-make the offense
I think they may add Clifton but they are going to need to add a lot of bodies in here and soon

Shanahan also apparently wants Portis to be involved - at least for now - one of Portis' strongest attributes is his blocking and no matter who the QB is here (especially if he's s l o w QB) we are going to need a good back that can also block well

HAIL

PulpExposure · Post by **PulpExposure** » Fri Mar 05, 2010 11:03 am

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Countertrey wrote:Fortunately, it appears that no matter how things break down this year, there will probably be a top 5 or 6 player at a position of need available.

Isn't it cool we have so many needs!

You're such a ray of sunshine, Kaz! :wink:

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Fri Mar 05, 2010 11:07 am

Whats to say that Clifton doesn't play RT and Okung at LT.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Fri Mar 05, 2010 11:45 am

frankcal20 wrote:Whats to say that Clifton doesn't play RT and Okung at LT.

no worries - as long as we can't get Bradford at QB

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:01 pm

PulpExposure wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Countertrey wrote:Fortunately, it appears that no matter how things break down this year, there will probably be a top 5 or 6 player at a position of need available.

Isn't it cool we have so many needs!

You're such a ray of sunshine, Kaz!

There's a bright side to everything, if you only look for it. :lol:

yupchagee · Post by **yupchagee** » Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:58 pm

Manchester_Redskin wrote:I can see us taking Clausen at 4 , if we sign Clifton.

I hope not. If we want a QB who isn't a leader, we might as well stay with JC.

Gibbs4Life · Post by **Gibbs4Life** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 1:52 am

I wouldn't mind Bradford, he's money especially with Malcom

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 2:20 pm

Gibbs4Life wrote:I wouldn't mind Bradford, he's money especially with Malcom

Totally different offense and they haven't played together in 3 years. I also remember that John Parker Wilson was Kelly's QB when he was there.

NEWSKINSFAN119 · Post by **NEWSKINSFAN119** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 8:03 pm

frankcal20 wrote:
Gibbs4Life wrote:I wouldn't mind Bradford, he's money especially with Malcom

Totally different offense and they haven't played together in 3 years. I also remember that John Parker Wilson was Kelly's QB when he was there.

chemistry is chemistry if you know a guy's tendencies then you will click with him it will just take some snaps in OTA's and training camp to get the connection going again and by the way JP Wilson went to Alabama not Oklahoma. :roll:

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:26 pm

frankcal20 wrote:
Gibbs4Life wrote:I wouldn't mind Bradford, he's money especially with Malcom

Totally different offense and they haven't played together in 3 years. I also remember that John Parker Wilson was Kelly's QB when he was there.

Um, John Parker Wilson never played at Oklahoma. He was Alabama's qb.

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:32 pm

Whoops