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

Trade the pick for lots of picks. Look at our current roster, we only have 3 OTs, and none of them are starters! We can replenish our offensive line if Bradford falls to us.

Although I may agree with you about needing more picks...I dont think thats THE plan....just yours. I would bet that Shanny jumps all over Bradford and goes OT in round 2.

Me personally, I would rather Okung in rd 1 even if Bradford is on the board. But if Bradford is on the board still, I dont see us trading down...it would be nice though

I agreed. We all know we need more picks, however, it is almost impossible to trade down from number 4. I dont even think about it.

Okung, Lefevour

Bradford is the QB - but if not, we get Okung and then just keep adding offensive linemen - we can find a QB later and we've already got 4 that can fill in

you have to take the QB - there are tons of offensive linemen

If Bradford is there at 4 we are taking him unless we get absolutely blown away with a deal.

SkinsJock wrote:Bradford is the QB - but if not, we get Okung and then just keep adding offensive linemen - we can find a QB later and we've already got 4 that can fill in

you have to take the QB - there are tons of offensive linemen

I really am a proponent of picking Okung because he is as dynamic a tackle as you will find. Some years you wont find a tackle as talented as him.
Without a left tackle this year, nothing will matter and we might as well start talking about next years draft.

I think you take Bradford at 4 and trade cambell and Haynesworth for a #1 and pick up a LT

Bradford is not going to be there at 4 - if we want to fantasize about being able to have McNabb and Bradford that's fine but that is a dream

we are taking Bradford if he's there - we are NOT going to trade that pick if we can pick up Bradford BUT that is just not happening

we should take Okung if we cannot trade out of that spot BUT we are ONLY taking Okung if we cannot get Bradford

I think that's fairly clear

chiefhog44 wrote:I think you take Bradford at 4 and trade cambell and Haynesworth for a #1 and pick up a LT

Ok but what's your plan if nobody wants to give you a #1 pick for Haynesworth and Campbell?

SkinsJock wrote:Bradford is not going to be there at 4 - if we want to fantasize about being able to have McNabb and Bradford that's fine but that is a dream

we are taking Bradford if he's there - we are NOT going to trade that pick if we can pick up Bradford BUT that is just not happening

we should take Okung if we cannot trade out of that spot BUT we are ONLY taking Okung if we cannot get Bradford

I think that's fairly clear

Why would we trade for McNabb, then draft bradford, when we have no offensive tackles and no picks until the 4th round. They would trade down in a heartbeat.

Mcnabb is the short term QB - Bradford is the long term QB - you have to take him if you can

Not going to happen because Bradford will be a Ram


mark my words - Bradford will be a Redskin if he's there at 4

SkinsJock wrote:Mcnabb is the short term QB - Bradford is the long term QB - you have to take him if you can

Not going to happen because Bradford will be a Ram


mark my words - Bradford will be a Redskin if he's there at 4

I will mark them but they aren't correct

riggofan wrote:

chiefhog44 wrote:I think you take Bradford at 4 and trade cambell and Haynesworth for a #1 and pick up a LT

Ok but what's your plan if nobody wants to give you a #1 pick for Haynesworth and Campbell?

I thinik you take Bradford no matter what. pick up some blue collar free agents to solidify the line.

We should just concentrate on a O-line guy like Okung because with out these big linemen, it doesn't matter who is behind the center.