The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 6:23 pm**

The Hogster wrote:If we could acquire another 2nd - we could address the QB position if Shanahan likes any of the 2nd round guys like: Lefevour, McCoy, etc.

Good point

:-k

How would we acquire another second though, any ideas?

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 6:34 pm**

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
The Hogster wrote:If we could acquire another 2nd - we could address the QB position if Shanahan likes any of the 2nd round guys like: Lefevour, McCoy, etc.

Good point

How would we acquire another second though, any ideas?

I've got a couple.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:22 pm**

If defenses are smart they will test that arm out by dumping him on it a few times

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:29 pm**

The Hogster wrote:Last year I was relieved when the Jets got Sanchez. This year I will be relieved if the Rams get Bradford. Our line was awful last year even when Samuels was in the game. Now we've lost him also and the line will get anyone killed. I like Okung at 4 and Saffold or Ducasse in the 2nd.
If we could acquire another 2nd - we could address the QB position if Shanahan likes any of the 2nd round guys like: Lefevour, McCoy, etc.

Let's get all the quotes out early -

"Campbell will look great behind an OK line"
"we should just rebuild the offensive line, any QB will be fine"

I could care less about another OK QB - Campbell and Grossman are "OK QBs" too :lol:

being this close to a QB that is as good as this is just a shame - we'll be able to look back in future years and say - "we really sucked in 2009 but it might have been better if we'd been a little bit worse cause then we could have drafted Bradford" :shock:

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:58 pm**

I'm not against building the line but it really is a shame not to have a really good QB

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:52 am**

The Hogster wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:
The Hogster wrote:If we could acquire another 2nd - we could address the QB position if Shanahan likes any of the 2nd round guys like: Lefevour, McCoy, etc.

Good point

How would we acquire another second though, any ideas?

I've got a couple.

Do any of them start with "Cool" and end with "ey?" :wink:

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:59 am**

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
The Hogster wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:
The Hogster wrote:If we could acquire another 2nd - we could address the QB position if Shanahan likes any of the 2nd round guys like: Lefevour, McCoy, etc.

Good point

How would we acquire another second though, any ideas?

I've got a couple.

Do any of them start with "Cool" and end with "ey?"

**slow clap**

**crickets**

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:22 am**

The Hogster wrote:Last year I was relieved when the Jets got Sanchez. This year I will be relieved if the Rams get Bradford. Our line was awful last year even when Samuels was in the game.

I've been feeling that same way since the season ended. But reading more about what Shanahan may be thinking with taking Bradford, I won't be crushed if we take him, especially if Shanahan feels he can be a franchise QB. The Redskins Insider item on it today has some good stuff:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redski ... d-sam.html

I think the biggest thing if we take Bradford is that we don't rush him onto the field this year behind our woeful line. Get what you can from Campbell for another year.

This is DC though. If we're 2-4 to start the season you know people will be HOWLING for the rookie whether it is the right thing to do or not.

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:27 am**

The Hogster wrote:**slow clap**

**crickets**

That's your insult? How long did you spend coming up with that?

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:06 pm**

Manchester_Redskin wrote:If defenses are smart they will test that arm out by dumping him on it a few times

yea i'll really be happy if they avoid Bradford. I see no reason he can't be a good qb. I just have reservations about the competition he faced, the fact his team was so good, and most importantly that his throwing shoulder could crumble at any moment

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:19 pm**

SkinsJock wrote:
The Hogster wrote:Last year I was relieved when the Jets got Sanchez. This year I will be relieved if the Rams get Bradford. Our line was awful last year even when Samuels was in the game. Now we've lost him also and the line will get anyone killed. I like Okung at 4 and Saffold or Ducasse in the 2nd.
If we could acquire another 2nd - we could address the QB position if Shanahan likes any of the 2nd round guys like: Lefevour, McCoy, etc.

Let's get all the quotes out early -

"Campbell will look great behind an OK line"
"we should just rebuild the offensive line, any QB will be fine"

I could care less about another OK QB - Campbell and Grossman are "OK QBs" too

being this close to a QB that is as good as this is just a shame - we'll be able to look back in future years and say - "we really sucked in 2009 but it might have been better if we'd been a little bit worse cause then we could have drafted Bradford"

I'm not going to go out on a limb and say Bradford will not live up to expectations, but I will say, the odds are not really with him. Bradford is over-rated. Now before all you Kiper Kool Aid drinkers get bent out of shape, let me explain.

Is Bradford a very good QB prospect? Yes.

Is Bradford worth the #1 overall pick? No.

This is a QB poor draft compared to most years. There is not a QB who is universally graded high enough, regardless of position, to be a top 5 pick. Right now, we are seeing what happens every year with QB's in the draft, they start rising up the boards. This is due to the importance of the position, the lack of quality QB's available and teams that become a little more desperate to find a QB after not finding one in free agency.

Bradford just had his Pro Day and everyone is raving about it, saying it solidifies him as the #1. That's fine. But Pro Days are rarely bad for QB's. They throw in shorts, with no pressure, to WR's in shorts, who aren't covered by anyone. It is a glorified game of catch. One of the most prominent scouts in the NFL said just yesterday, "yeah, well Jemarcus Russel had probably the best Pro Day of any QB in history" and look where that got him.

So, while bradford may work out fine, I think he will have an uphill climb to handle the #1 draft hype, learn an NFL offense (coming from a college spread offense) work behind the STL O-line and throw to the STL WR's. There are 5 or 6 players who I think have a better chance to become a Pro Bowler than Bradford in this years draft class. I think there are 15-20 players better than Claussen in this years draft class. Too many to say, but probably 30-50 better than Tebow and Colt McCoy. I hope we draft Okung 1st, if he is available at #4 (which is no guarantee since Detroit also likes him.)

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:57 pm**

brad7686 wrote:
Manchester_Redskin wrote:If defenses are smart they will test that arm out by dumping him on it a few times

yea i'll really be happy if they avoid Bradford. I see no reason he can't be a good qb. I just have reservations about the competition he faced, the fact his team was so good, and most importantly that his throwing shoulder could crumble at any moment

I hope we don't live to regret it, but I agree there are too many questions about him. If we do pick him I'll support the team, but I am hoping the Rams take him and end it.

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:59 pm**

Manchester_Redskin wrote:If defenses are smart they will test that arm out by dumping him on it a few times

It's ridiculous have vastly his injury was overblown. First of all, it wasn't even that serious. He didn't tear his labrum or his his rotator cuff, which would have been much more severe injuries. He didn't tear a ligament, but insteadhad a sprained AC joint, which is in the back of the shoulder. Secondly, he isn't a fragile. He fell awkwardly on his shoulder and pretty much any quarterback would have been injured on that play. Thirdly, there are qb's in the league that have had much more sever shoulder injuries, such as Drew Brees, who had his entire shoulder reconstructed. I'd say he's doing pretty well after that injury.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 3:49 pm**

Colt McCoy completed every pass at his pro day. So the ppl that are so wowed by Sam Bradford's might see that scripted pro day completions aren't always that big of a deal.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:12 pm**

I don't know... McCoy's accuracy has always been one of his selling points. I don't know that it changes a thing.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:18 pm**

I think that for Gil Brandt to say that in his opinion Bradford looks like he will be a very good QB is really a very big deal

I don't think that Bradford should be the #1 overall draft pick BUT I do think we should take him at 4 no matter who else is available :lol:

I also do not want to try and trade up for him either

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 7:09 pm**

I wasn't saying it changed anything, I just saw posts all over the net that Bradford is now Johnny Unitas or something because he only had one drop at a pro day.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:11 pm**

SkinsJock wrote:I think that for Gil Brandt to say that in his opinion Bradford looks like he will be a very good QB is really a very big deal

I don't think that Bradford should be the #1 overall draft pick BUT I do think we should take him at 4 no matter who else is available

I also do not want to try and trade up for him either

Brandt also told Holmgren if he drafts McCoy and runs the West Coast offense, he would make them forget about Joe Montana. you have to take these comments with a grain of salt. Although, I do like McCoy quite a bit.

Posted: **Thu Apr 01, 2010 5:59 am**

There is a reason why so many people are high on Bradford, and I think the Redskins would be crazy to pass on him if they can get him. A strategic mistake.

I've watched a little bit of him .. and he is accurate, has a big arm, and a quick release. He really does get the ball out in a hurry. He also makes those misdirection throws that second tier talents don't make, which indicates good vision of the field, and a good tactician.

I know the need is great on the O-line, and the safer bet is there ... and the greater risk is with the QB, but the payoff is much greater over the long haul if you pick the right QB.

Problem is, the Redskins need both. You're going nowhere without a franchise QB, so if one is there, you gotta take the risk, unless you think Brennan has a shot to be the guy.

Posted: **Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:27 am**

RayNAustin wrote:Problem is, the Redskins need both. You're going nowhere without a franchise QB, so if one is there, you gotta take the risk, unless you think Brennan has a shot to be the guy.

We have a QB, and we no longer have a 2nd round pick

Mike Shanahan a veteran quarterback to build around rather than use their top pick on one of the underclassmen who might take years to develop.
Left offensive tackle Russell Okung is now the likely pick for the Redskins, as the team hopes to rebuild their depleted offensive line.

Posted: **Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:35 am**

<<< Checks date... yup, it's that time of year...

Posted: **Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:39 am**

first letter of each sentence :wink:

Posted: **Thu Apr 01, 2010 10:00 am**

Too obvious haha

Posted: **Thu Apr 01, 2010 11:36 pm**

fleetus wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:I think that for Gil Brandt to say that in his opinion Bradford looks like he will be a very good QB is really a very big deal

I don't think that Bradford should be the #1 overall draft pick BUT I do think we should take him at 4 no matter who else is available

I also do not want to try and trade up for him either

Brandt also told Holmgren if he drafts McCoy and runs the West Coast offense, he would make them forget about Joe Montana. you have to take these comments with a grain of salt. Although, I do like McCoy quite a bit.

totally agree - both Brandt and Holmgren also thought the Redskins should take Bradford but if he's gone we should take Okung - I like the way these guys think - almost makes me feel like I know what I'm talking about :shock:

Posted: **Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:54 am**

SkinsJock wrote:
fleetus wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:I think that for Gil Brandt to say that in his opinion Bradford looks like he will be a very good QB is really a very big deal

I don't think that Bradford should be the #1 overall draft pick BUT I do think we should take him at 4 no matter who else is available

I also do not want to try and trade up for him either

Brandt also told Holmgren if he drafts McCoy and runs the West Coast offense, he would make them forget about Joe Montana. you have to take these comments with a grain of salt. Although, I do like McCoy quite a bit.

totally agree - both Brandt and Holmgren also thought the Redskins should take Bradford but if he's gone we should take Okung - I like the way these guys think - almost makes me feel like I know what I'm talking about

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Sam Bradford?