Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

Wow, they only tendered a 2nd. He & Rocky ain't happy.

Looks like to me they're almost encouraging a trade offer or letting the market decide whether to keep him or not. If the price is too high for them, they get a 2nd round pick. If not, they re-sign him at whatever offer another team comes up with, which will likely be less than the Skins would pay if his agent dealt directly w/them. Or they opt to meet the contract & ask the other team for another pick/player.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

From ESPN.com

Washington Redskins

Even though Mike Shanahan wouldn't confirm the Skins are transitioning to a 3-4, you know it's coming. That's what new defensive coordinator Jim Haslett feels the most comfortable doing. Everyone will talk about quarterback and offensive tackle this offseason, but the Redskins need to be on the lookout for 3-4 defensive tackles. As we saw with the Cowboys, transitioning to a 3-4 isn't always smooth. There's no guarantee that linebacker London Fletcher can hold up in a 3-4 because he'll have to take on enormous guards and centers on a regular basis. You'll see a big transformation with this team over the next couple years. If Sam Bradford's already gone, look for the Redskins to zero in on left tackles Russell Okung and Bryan Bulaga. Either one of those players could end up anchoring the offensive line for nine or 10 years. Tremendous college players who both have a high ceiling. The Skins have taken a long look at Campbell out of Maryland, so they'll be looking to see if he slips into the second round.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;668621]From ESPN.com

Washington Redskins

Even though Mike Shanahan wouldn't confirm the Skins are transitioning to a 3-4, you know it's coming. That's what new defensive coordinator Jim Haslett feels the most comfortable doing. Everyone will talk about quarterback and offensive tackle this offseason, but the Redskins need to be on the lookout for 3-4 defensive tackles. As we saw with the Cowboys, transitioning to a 3-4 isn't always smooth. There's no guarantee that linebacker London Fletcher can hold up in a 3-4 because he'll have to take on enormous guards and centers on a regular basis. You'll see a big transformation with this team over the next couple years. If Sam Bradford's already gone, look for the Redskins to zero in on left tackles Russell Okung and Bryan Bulaga. Either one of those players could end up anchoring the offensive line for nine or 10 years. Tremendous college players who both have a high ceiling. The Skins have taken a long look at Campbell out of Maryland, so they'll be looking to see if he slips into the second round.[/quote]

Nothing much new here, but it does inadvertently highlight the questionable judgment to switch to a 3-4 when we need to acquire so much talent on offense. There's just not much leftover to give the defense, and a base 3-4 means we need at least two editions on the d-line and probably one or two new faces in the LB corp.

...Haslett may be gone in a year regardless but the prospect of a defense "missing" the right players in several positions is sure to set him back from the beginning. Again, a very curious decision by the FO/staff.

Guilty: The Evil Blackmail Post
 

Well all this time I've been talking about how people keep talking about next years QB class and how it will be better then the current years, well now it's time to present the evidence. The following posters are guilty of pumping up the 2010 QB class in 2009. Keep in mind I don't exactly know where all these posters stand now and we're obviously allowed to change our opinion but for now charges will be brought fourth::FIREdevil

[quote=Trample the Elderly;549733]Next year will have A LOT more depth for QBs.[/quote]

[quote=Lotus;549743]You are right on. This year is a bad qb year and next year looks different.[/quote]

[quote=Redskin Jim;549748]McCoy, Tebow as well.[/quote]

[quote=53Fan;549773]Which is why Sanchez decided to come out this year instead of taking his coaches advice and playing his senior year.[/quote]

[quote=Gymratfwp;544525]why draft sanchez?

IF we get a QB it should be next year...Sam Bradford, Tim Tebow, and my favorite Colt McCoy are all going to be out. Each one of these guys is better than Sanchez. The only reason Sanchez came out is for the money. If he waited until next year to come out, he would fall to at least the 2. Sanchez waited until he knew that both Bradford, Tebow and McCoy were staying in school to announce that he was coming out, because he wants to cash in...dude is a bust waiting to happen.[/quote]

[quote=GusFrerotte;544027]Why draft Sanchez? I mean come on! We have a pretty decent trio already, and depending on where Collins is in 2010 as well as JC, I rather draft McCoy or Bradford. Big 12 is way more brutal than the Pac-10, and those dudes are ready for the NFL. How many USC QB's have fared well as of late in the NFL? Carson Palmer was pretty decent til he messed up his knee, now he is a walking injury, but Leinhart being beaten out by Warner doesn't bode well for his ass. We are better off taking an USC LB way before even considering Sanchez. It is way better to draft the real deal in either Colt or Sam in 2010.[/quote]

[quote=Dirtbag359;542323]lol, I guess your right. At the very least we got Campbell going into his second year in Zorns system and the O-Line will probably get upgraded. And hey if we suck this year we'll be in position to choose next year between Sam Bradford and Colt McCoy.[/quote]
[quote]Stay away from Mark Sanchez! If we are that desperate for a QB (I'm a JC fan) next years class will be much better than this one. Besides, USC's offense was the worst it's been in a few years. The USC defense was the dominant force for that team.Hopefully, they are posturing for additional picks.

Posted by: dcwun | April 15, 2009 9:35 PM | Report abuse[/quote]

[quote]. If he stinks next year, fine, don't resign him. There will be at least two quarterbacks in next year's draft who are as good or better than Sanchez that the 'Skins could draft with their high draft pick or trade up to get.

Posted by: skinsfan213 | April 24, 2009 9:10 AM | Report abuse[/quote]

I'd now like the take this time to give you, my loyal readers a chance to aw over Sanchez's 92.7 Postseason QB rating.

Re: Guilty: The Evil Blackmail Post
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;668680]Well all this time I've been talking about how people keep talking about next years QB class and how it will be better then the current years, well now it's time to present the evidence. The following posters are guilty of pumping up the 2010 QB class in 2009. Keep in mind I don't exactly know where all these posters stand now and we're obviously allowed to change our opinion but for now charges will be brought fourth::FIREdevil


I'd now like the take this time to give you, my loyal readers a chance to aw over Sanchez's 92.7 Postseason QB rating.[/quote]You're right, if Sanchez had been here, we would have won all those close postseason games we lost. :tongue

The 2010 class is stronger than the 2009 class. Those commenters were correct, including yourself. But from the perspective of holding the fourth overall pick in either draft, the point is basically moot. Sanchez would have been a bad overdraft at No. 4 for Seattle, who if nothing else last year, found out they needed a QB. And I wouldn't select McCoy/Bradford at No. 4 overall this year.

But as the value/salary structure begins to change later down the board, I feel way more comfortable with the quality of this class than with the 09 class. It's far from a likelyhood that you'll get a guy who is better than Campbell drafting from this class, but that's only one dimension of our QB need. The other is depth/insurance against having a contract dilemma in 2011.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;668621]From ESPN.com

Washington Redskins

Even though Mike Shanahan wouldn't confirm the Skins are transitioning to a 3-4, you know it's coming. That's what new defensive coordinator Jim Haslett feels the most comfortable doing. Everyone will talk about quarterback and offensive tackle this offseason, but the Redskins need to be on the lookout for 3-4 defensive tackles. As we saw with the Cowboys, transitioning to a 3-4 isn't always smooth. There's no guarantee that linebacker London Fletcher can hold up in a 3-4 because he'll have to take on enormous guards and centers on a regular basis. You'll see a big transformation with this team over the next couple years. If Sam Bradford's already gone, look for the Redskins to zero in on left tackles Russell Okung and Bryan Bulaga. Either one of those players could end up anchoring the offensive line for nine or 10 years. Tremendous college players who both have a high ceiling. The Skins have taken a long look at Campbell out of Maryland, so they'll be looking to see if he slips into the second round.[/quote]

I'm not saying they're getting rid of Fletche but they're preparing for him to not be here much more than another year. Highly doubtful that Campbell slips to them in the second round. Possible Trent Williams does

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=SmootSmack;667256]Well you won't be happy to hear there are rumors circulating that the Lions and Chiefs are working on a deal that would give the Lions Glen Dorsey and allow them to draft Okung at #2[/quote]

Ok, so it looks like it may be the Browns that are providing Detroit with a DT

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4967021]Sources: Cleveland Browns to trade Corey Willliams to Detroit Lions for draft pick - ESPN[/url]

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=SmootSmack;669486]Ok, so it looks like it may be the Browns that are providing Detroit with a DT

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4967021]Sources: Cleveland Browns to trade Corey Willliams to Detroit Lions for draft pick - ESPN[/url][/quote]

Sounds like this makes the Lions' plans harder to predict. According to the article, it looks like they could do a lot of things, pick up Suh or trade down.

Or pick up Okung (not in the article) :mad:

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

If Bradord, Shu and Okung are off the board when we draft that is a huge dagger.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=mredskins;669541]If Bradord, Shu and Okung are off the board when we draft that is a huge dagger.[/quote]

Have faith my child. Bryan Buluga is a talent worthy of #4 overall.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

Big Hawkeyes fan. Love Bulaga. Wouldn't take him at 4

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=SmootSmack;669580]Big Hawkeyes fan. Love Bulaga. Wouldn't take him at 4[/quote]

Oh man, the disclaimer followed by the denial. Why the lack of faith? Is it related more towards his ability or medical history?

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

I see him as a RT in the NFL. And I don't spend a 4th overall on a RT

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=mredskins;669541]If Bradord, Shu and Okung are off the board when we draft that is a huge dagger.[/quote]

Trent Williams if that crap situation happens.

[URL="http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/trent-williams?id=497073"]NFL Events: Combine Player Profiles - Trent Williams[/URL]

Top 5 performer in
[URL="http://www.nfl.com/combine/top-performers?tabIndex=0"]40-yard dash[/URL] | [URL="http://www.nfl.com/combine/top-performers?tabIndex=2"]Vertical jump[/URL] | [URL="http://www.nfl.com/combine/top-performers?tabIndex=3"]Broad jump[/URL] | [URL="http://www.nfl.com/combine/top-performers?tabIndex=5"]20-yard shuttle[/URL]

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=mredskins;669541]If Bradord, Shu and Okung are off the board when we draft that is a huge dagger.[/quote]

What if Suh is available at 4, do we take him? I would be all for that, but if they're dead set on going 3-4 they'd have to make sure he would be a good fit at nose.

I wouldn't mind taking Suh & then playing a lot of 4-3 w/he & AH inside, also playing 3-4 w/AH at DE. Suh could play DE in the 3-4 as well. I think the guy is too good to pass up.