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

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

While I actually think Bradford is a good pick at 4...and I think he has a ton of potential to be a great NFL QB (he's smart and he's accurate, and has a good enough arm).

I wouldn't hate the pick, and I'd even understand it. I just think he may die behind our miserable o-line.

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

I wouldn't call the Cutler pick a victory just yet.

Bradford isn't the pick. There will be better, non-fragile qb's next year. Take Okung.

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

I wouldn't call the Cutler pick a victory just yet.

Bradford isn't the pick. There will be better, non-fragile qb's next year. Take Okung.

Not saying we should or shouldn't draft Bradford, but he certainly isn't fragile. He had one injury (sprained AC joint) during his time at Oklahoma. Brees had a much more serious shoulder injury. Is he fragile? Rivers tore his ACL. Is he fragile? This is football, injuries are going to happen. It's not like Bradford got lightly touched and got hurt. He had his shoulder drive into the ground on a turf field.

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

I wouldn't call the Cutler pick a victory just yet.

2 first rounds for him is a victory, though

PulpExposure wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

I wouldn't call the Cutler pick a victory just yet.

2 first rounds for him is a victory, though

definitely

CanesSkins26 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

I wouldn't call the Cutler pick a victory just yet.

Bradford isn't the pick. There will be better, non-fragile qb's next year. Take Okung.

Not saying we should or shouldn't draft Bradford, but he certainly isn't fragile. He had one injury (sprained AC joint) during his time at Oklahoma. Brees had a much more serious shoulder injury. Is he fragile? Rivers tore his ACL. Is he fragile? This is football, injuries are going to happen. It's not like Bradford got lightly touched and got hurt. He had his shoulder drive into the ground on a turf field.

Possibly, but I'm not sure how smart it is to put an average sized, average mobility, rookie qb behind one of the worst O-lines in the history of football when he is coming off a pretty bad shoulder injury.

Wait now that Shanahan is the leader of the Redskins, who will he jerk out of draft picks now??? smh

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

I wouldn't call the Cutler pick a victory just yet.

Bradford isn't the pick. There will be better, non-fragile qb's next year. Take Okung.

Not saying we should or shouldn't draft Bradford, but he certainly isn't fragile. He had one injury (sprained AC joint) during his time at Oklahoma. Brees had a much more serious shoulder injury. Is he fragile? Rivers tore his ACL. Is he fragile? This is football, injuries are going to happen. It's not like Bradford got lightly touched and got hurt. He had his shoulder drive into the ground on a turf field.

Possibly, but I'm not sure how smart it is to put an average sized, average mobility, rookie qb behind one of the worst O-lines in the history of football when he is coming off a pretty bad shoulder injury.

Who says he's going to start week 1?

PulpExposure wrote:I just think he may die behind our miserable o-line.

When the pick description uses the words "when healthy" it's particularly scary

The Hogster wrote:Wait now that Shanahan is the leader of the Redskins, who will he jerk out of draft picks now??? smh

hahaha.. that's pretty good

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

I wouldn't call the Cutler pick a victory just yet.

Bradford isn't the pick. There will be better, non-fragile qb's next year. Take Okung.

Not saying we should or shouldn't draft Bradford, but he certainly isn't fragile. He had one injury (sprained AC joint) during his time at Oklahoma. Brees had a much more serious shoulder injury. Is he fragile? Rivers tore his ACL. Is he fragile? This is football, injuries are going to happen. It's not like Bradford got lightly touched and got hurt. He had his shoulder drive into the ground on a turf field.

Possibly, but I'm not sure how smart it is to put an average sized, average mobility, rookie qb behind one of the worst O-lines in the history of football when he is coming off a pretty bad shoulder injury.

You're assuming that (1) Bradford would start week 1 and that (2) we wouldn't be able to improve our line if we didn't draft Okung in the first. I don't think that either one of those assumptions is accurate.

CanesSkins26 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

I wouldn't call the Cutler pick a victory just yet.

Bradford isn't the pick. There will be better, non-fragile qb's next year. Take Okung.

Not saying we should or shouldn't draft Bradford, but he certainly isn't fragile. He had one injury (sprained AC joint) during his time at Oklahoma. Brees had a much more serious shoulder injury. Is he fragile? Rivers tore his ACL. Is he fragile? This is football, injuries are going to happen. It's not like Bradford got lightly touched and got hurt. He had his shoulder drive into the ground on a turf field.

Possibly, but I'm not sure how smart it is to put an average sized, average mobility, rookie qb behind one of the worst O-lines in the history of football when he is coming off a pretty bad shoulder injury.

You're assuming that (1) Bradford would start week 1 and that (2) we wouldn't be able to improve our line if we didn't draft Okung in the first. I don't think that either one of those assumptions is accurate.

I agree. I think we will fiercely go after FA OL this year and that starts with attempting to sign our own, Levi Jones. I could see him at RT until we get a replacement. We can't draft all new starter at OL.

Idealy I would love to get a LT, Rt and RG in free agency but that is just wishful thinking. If we sign Jones and a FA OG that would give us the option of the best QB or LT at #4. I personally think you take the LT at #4 and the QB at #37.

There are TOO MANY questions with the QBs in this draft to take one that high, but come hell or high water I think you need to draft one day 1 of the draft.

I would love to trade down from #4, but no one wants to move up into the top 5 anymore. And if they are really that hot for a certain player then maybe we should consider the guy. There are only two spot (other then ST) that you have to rule out for #4 and that is RB and WR.

RB and WR should be treated like sluts. They are good for getting you all turned on, but in the long run you're left with someone you really don't want a round for the long haul and you could have picked up for $50 at any street corner or a dinner at TGI Fridays

CanesSkins26 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

brad7686 wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:

Sam Bradford*, QB, Oklahoma
Mike Shanahan and the Redskins can get a quarterback here who might have been the top player taken had he opted to come out last year. The Redskins need to find their franchise quarterback, and when healthy, Bradford is an exceptionally accurate passer with an underrated arm. Shanahan also hit on his last QB selection when he drafted Jay Cutler in Denver.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft10/insider/news/story?id=4841432

I wouldn't call the Cutler pick a victory just yet.

Bradford isn't the pick. There will be better, non-fragile qb's next year. Take Okung.

Not saying we should or shouldn't draft Bradford, but he certainly isn't fragile. He had one injury (sprained AC joint) during his time at Oklahoma. Brees had a much more serious shoulder injury. Is he fragile? Rivers tore his ACL. Is he fragile? This is football, injuries are going to happen. It's not like Bradford got lightly touched and got hurt. He had his shoulder drive into the ground on a turf field.

Possibly, but I'm not sure how smart it is to put an average sized, average mobility, rookie qb behind one of the worst O-lines in the history of football when he is coming off a pretty bad shoulder injury.

You're assuming that (1) Bradford would start week 1 and that (2) we wouldn't be able to improve our line if we didn't draft Okung in the first. I don't think that either one of those assumptions is accurate.

Well, If we don't get McNeill, I don't see how the pass protection is going to improve that much without taking an OT first round. I'm not saying Bradford will get injured, but the Skins have enough people with injury problems as it is. They almost need to make immaculate health a prerequisite. I don't think they should take a qb, but I would definitely take Claussen first.

I would expect us to draft Bradford if the guys in charge here think he can be a really good QB - I do not think we are going to get a better chance or have a top 10 pick again for many years

I do not think that Bradford is at all injury prone and I'm sure they will not use him until they have prepared him mentally and physically to play - this is a huge decision, if it is made - they understand they cannot miss on taking a QB at #4

I don't see a Samuels type of offensive lineman available and that is the only thing we need right now - we need to rebuild our offensive line and that will take a lot longer than many here are going to like but that is the most difficult group to have playing really well together

so ....... IF we cannot find a guy that can be a part of a really good offensive line for 10-12 years AND we have a shot at a really good QB for our future we have to take him

I'll put it another way - I'm not worried about Bradford physically, I just think we need a really good O line and that is going to take a while BUT at some time we are also going to want to have a really good QB and this guy might be that in a few years - Bradford has all the attributes and I have a feeling that Shanahan will make him into a really good QB that Kyle will utilize as he did with Staub this past year

The way I see it we have no OT's that belong in the league, and a QB that is in the top half among starters. Not saying that will be enough in the end, but having no OT's that are above CFL level WILL affect the team in a negative way for sure. I don't know where you guys are finding these magical free agent OT's at, but I don't see them. Unless we somehow wrestle McNeill away from SD for HUGE money.

The problem is that Campbell leaving appears to be the assumption at this point, but that's entirely due to the Redskins FO view of him. So we're left with no QB and no line. Tough to fill both in one year, even if it is an uncapped 2010.

I can't see the justification for drafting any QB with an assumption that he'll play in 2010. But if that's the case, why not wait a year to get a QB anyway, and go balls to the wall on OL this offseason?

Irn-Bru wrote:The problem is that Campbell leaving appears to be the assumption at this point, but that's entirely due to the Redskins FO view of him. So we're left with no QB and no line. Tough to fill both in one year, even if it is an uncapped 2010.

I can't see the justification for drafting any QB with an assumption that he'll play in 2010. But if that's the case, why not wait a year to get a QB anyway, and go balls to the wall on OL this offseason?

Irn-Bru wrote:The problem is that Campbell leaving appears to be the assumption at this point, but that's entirely due to the Redskins FO view of him. So we're left with no QB and no line. Tough to fill both in one year, even if it is an uncapped 2010.

I can't see the justification for drafting any QB with an assumption that he'll play in 2010. But if that's the case, why not wait a year to get a QB anyway, and go balls to the wall on OL this offseason?

If we go all out for OL this year we can draft starters for us in the first and second rounds (there are some quality OL projected for the second round.
We can also pick up an FA or two-- all of which will drastically improve our OL. I'm all for it. However, I do not fool myself into believing that we can then pick up a franchise QB next year. With an improved Ol we'll be back to 8 and 8 or so and out of contention for a top QB. When I say pick Okung at #4, I am also saying that we'll have to stick with Campbell and hope he improves.

Irn-Bru wrote:The problem is that Campbell leaving appears to be the assumption at this point, but that's entirely due to the Redskins FO view of him. So we're left with no QB and no line. Tough to fill both in one year, even if it is an uncapped 2010.

I can't see the justification for drafting any QB with an assumption that he'll play in 2010. But if that's the case, why not wait a year to get a QB anyway, and go balls to the wall on OL this offseason?

Well, I would say with the regime change if JC is leaving or not is completely unknown at this point. Shanahan could well decide JC is the one to fill the role while he grooms a younger replacement. Probably JC's salary demands, another unknown, will have a significant impact as well and we don't know if he's a RFA or UFA at this point. We just don't know what's going to happen right now.

We may not know a lot of things but one thing for sure is I'm tired of "wishing & hoping" that certain players are going to be able to make the other players around them better
that was the mantra last year "let's give these guys on the O line a chance, we hope that they they will be fine and we can add to that next year ..."
"we are hoping will see a lot of improvement from Campbell this year because he's had a whole year with Zorn"

give me a break - let Shanahan and Allen and whomever else is in the FO (NOT Snyder) do their thing and we all need to be very patient - we will need at least 2 drafts and possibly 3 - IF we can get a QB to come in here and learn behind whoever is starting here we can then insert him when we have the offense ready for him

I am sure these guys will not be like crazyhorse suggests and "hope" for anything to happen - the only hope here is that we will not be managing this team "wishing and hoping" like Snyder and Cerrato did

I am not exactly in favor of drafting Bradford BUT whoever they pick at #4 better be a really good player for this team for many years - we need to consider the thinking of the present FO not the past FO - how good are the players we select to be a part of this franchise this year and next going to be to this franchise in 2013 and beyond?

OK - here's the question - is Okung likely to be more important to this franchise in 4-10 years than Bradford?


hopefully the FO will find a way to add many players not just a few - we are a franchise that has just gone 4-12 and while we could have won a couple that we lost we also won games we should not have - we are in terrible shape

SkinsJock wrote:OK - here's the question - is Okung likely to be more important to this franchise in 4-10 years than Bradford?

Okung is irrelevant in that question, as is anyone else except Bradford with the #4 pick. The only question with Bradford is if they think he's the real thing or not. If he is (they think) the real thing and available, we take him. If not, then he's out and it's a question of what the best move with the pick is. But you don't pass on a projected franchise QB with any pick if you don't have one.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:OK - here's the question - is Okung likely to be more important to this franchise in 4-10 years than Bradford?

Okung is irrelevant in that question, as is anyone else except Bradford with the #4 pick. The only question with Bradford is if they think he's the real thing or not. If he is (they think) the real thing and available, we take him. If not, then he's out and it's a question of what the best move with the pick is. But you don't pass on a projected franchise QB with any pick if you don't have one.

Yea, and I just don't see him as a guy who can't miss. He played on a team that was exponentially better than most of their opponents. When you watch film he has guys wide open on most of his big plays. Its not his fault that his team was so good, but at the same time its hard to evaluate him because of it. He's obviously coming off a shoulder injury, and his arm strength was already questionable before that. He is accurate. I would def. take Claussen over Bradford though.

KazooSkinsFan wrote: The only question with Bradford is if they think he's the real thing or not. If he is (they think) the real thing and available, we take him. If not, then he's out and it's a question of what the best move with the pick is. But you don't pass on a projected franchise QB with any pick if you don't have one.

thanks Kaz - that's what I'm hoping for too - all i want is for these guys to select Bradford if they think in a few years or more that he could be very good - IMO we are not going to get a chance to find someone that good at QB if at all

I totally agree with the thinking that there is no question about selecting a QB with that pick as long as they think he will be really good - I don't care if he does not play until 2012 - as long as they think he will be really good we need to get him for the future