Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=WaldSkins;647693]Yeah lets keep Campbell, I love watching skins games where he doesnt even attempt to throw the ball over ten yards.[/quote]

wHEN YOU HAVE MAYBE THE WORST O-LINE IN THE NFL YOU CAN NOT THROW THE BALL MORE THAN 10 YARDS BECAUSE ITS A JAIL BREAK. TEAMS ARE ONLY RUSHING 4 PLAYERS AND THEY STILL CANNOT PROTECT JC. DOES THIS CLEAR THINGS UP ABOUT PASSING MORE THAN 10 YARDS DOWN THE FIELD. WHEN YOU DONT GET TIME ON A 3 STEP DROP FORGET ABOUT GOING DEEP.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=larry michael is satan;647706]shanahan wants bradford.[/quote]

why do we want bradford who was injuried and missed the entire 2009 season. He is coming off a injury and has missed his entire senior season. Had 2 good years in college and we want to gamble our top 5 pick on a qb, what a mistake.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=murphy196;647770]I will be completely pissed if we draft Bradford!! The guy can't stay healthy and there is no comparison to him and Brees. Brees had a torn Labrum, which is an easy repair with surgery, Bradford's injury is just one hard hit away from putting him on the IR. Claussen looks like the most NFL ready QB that I've seen this year, especially if you want to take one with the first pick. I say if he isn't there when we pick, we trade our #1 for more picks and take a QB in the 2nd or 3rd.[/quote]

I rather take any other position besides QB with our 1st pick. 2nd round if we have to take a QB pick Tony Pike. Jimmy Clausen is better than Bradford.
__________________
I don't want us to draft a QB in the 1st round. We need a stud O-Lineman with the 1st pick. Redskins Fan Since 1972 SKINS89MOSS

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;647831]He's in the shotgun about 45% of the time if I recall correctly (not unlike Tom Brady). The first option should be Okung if he's there. But if he's not. I wouldn't have a problem with drafting Bradford at all. Bradford is getting scrutinized mainly because it's the popular thing to do with the top QBs coming out for the draft each year. But he's very talented.

Take Bradford in the 1st, draft Charles Brown at the top of the 2nd to be our LT, trade into the 3rd and take Calloway to be our RT. I'd be fine with that. (and ideally we trade into the 2nd and get someone like Dwyer as well) I'd rather do that than reach for an OT in the first round, just to say we got an offensive lineman.[/quote]

If the best LT is not available when we draft then I be okay with drafting CJ Spiller, Eric Berry, Brandon Spikes, or Taylor Mays. I want a impact player at the 5th pick than will be a all-pro and a game changer. QB is such a hard position to project and they normally sit for a few years.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

I'm rooting for Berry now, if Okung is gone, bring in rhe B MAN!

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

I slightly prefer Best to Spiller, and McLain to Spikes but not sure I want any of them at #5

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

To further explain about Berry, the one position our scouts are usually spot on about is Defense, so why not get the FS of the draft to help replace our beloved Sean Taylor, and help get Landry back to where he was most effective. HAPPY NEW YEAR FROM KOREA!

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

I would be pretty pissed if we drafted Bradford that high. Do we really want a kid that has been injured most of the year and has possible shoulder issues? I believe when you're picking top 10, it's important to get the best talent out there. Right now I really want Suh, but he'll be long gone by our pick -- I'm leaning Berry now. Okung wouldn't upset me, but is he a legitimate starting LT in this league? If we draft an T around 5, it needs to be what is projected to be a starting LT in this league within two years.

Personally, he's questionable to me. I want Suh or Berry seeing as how, talent wise, they're probably #1 and #2 in the draft.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

Hell if you draft a LT in the top 5 he better be starting from day one.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

two things we absolutely should not do with our first round pick are:

1) Draft a defensive player, especially a safety. The move would not fill one of our top 10 team needs and i highly doubt a safety would even be close to being the BPA on the board at 5/6 or wherever we'll be picking.

2) Draft a running back before our offensive line is fixed. Its going to take 2-3 years to really fix our line. Running backs generally are only productive for 5-6 years. so if we draft a running back that high, we're essentially wasting half of his productive career behind a dismal offensive line.

We'd be far better suited to trade UP to get Bradford, Suh, or Okung than we would be to make either of those moves at 5. I even have reservations about drafting a QB at 5. Any player drafted that high should be a day 1 starter and all of the QBs in this years draft are "projects." Not a one of them is NFL ready. If Shanahan is our coach, we'd be FAR better off trading our #2 for Leinhart than using our #1 on Clausen, McCoy or Bradford.

Ideally, i'd love to see us trade Campbell, our #2 (probably around 37 overall), and a conditional 2010 pick to Arizona for Leinhart and Arizona's #2 (probably around 52 overall). Then, try like hell to trade down in the 1st and pick up a 2nd round pick.

We'd have Leinhart and with our first three picks, we'd draft 2 OL and a RB.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=Mattyk;648088]Hell if you draft a LT in the top 5 he better be starting from day one.[/quote]
werd Matty

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

I think y'all are missing three draft factors 1. the remaining bowl games 2 the combine & 3 the players pro days. Trust me there will be other players that rise on the draft board

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;648095]two things we absolutely should not do with our first round pick are:

1) Draft a defensive player, especially a safety. The move would not fill one of our top 10 team needs and i highly doubt a safety would even be close to being the BPA on the board at 5/6 or wherever we'll be picking.

2) Draft a running back before our offensive line is fixed. Its going to take 2-3 years to really fix our line. Running backs generally are only productive for 5-6 years. so if we draft a running back that high, we're essentially wasting half of his productive career behind a dismal offensive line.

We'd be far better suited to trade UP to get Bradford, Suh, or Okung than we would be to make either of those moves at 5. I even have reservations about drafting a QB at 5. Any player drafted that high should be a day 1 starter and all of the QBs in this years draft are "projects." Not a one of them is NFL ready.[/quote]

1. Eric Berry is, I think, worth seriously considering at #5 but I'd be surprised if he's there. Suh is great and will probably the 1st or 2nd pick in the draft if he's there. Sometimes though, I can't help but think he's this years' Amobi Okoye. Who's doing ok, but probably not worth all the hype he got.

2. If we were drafting 15th instead of 5th (ish) I would very seriously want us to consider Jahvid Best or even Spiller. At 5 I would agree that it's not really beneficial to us

I don't think I would classify Bradford (or Clausen or Snead or Skelton) as "projects" I mean I don't expect him to tear up the league right away but I could see him starting for us by mid-2010. He won't sit on the bench for three years or anything like that.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=TheSmurfs22;646802]Keep Campbell and start shoring up the O line. When will the Skins learn. I love em, but damnit I feel like it is Groundhog Day, we keep doing the same thing time after time.[/quote]

You do know this is a mock draft and not DS saying this is who we are picking?

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;648100]1. Eric Berry is, I think, worth seriously considering at #5 but I'd be surprised if he's there. Suh is great and will probably the 1st or 2nd pick in the draft if he's there. Sometimes though, I can't help but think he's this years' Amobi Okoye. Who's doing ok, but probably not worth all the hype he got.

2. If we were drafting 15th instead of 5th (ish) I would very seriously want us to consider Jahvid Best or even Spiller. At 5 I would agree that it's not really beneficial to us

[3.] I don't think I would classify Bradford (or Clausen or Snead or Skelton) as "projects" I mean I don't expect him to tear up the league right away but I could see him starting for us by mid-2010. He won't sit on the bench for three years or anything like that.[/quote]

1. The redskins evidently felt the same way about Laron Landry. How's tha t working out for us? He's a baller, but we've not had the best luck drafting defensive backs in the top 10. Laron Landry - picked way to high (in retrospect). Carlos Rogers - picked way to high (in retrospect). Sean Taylor - started right away but itook almost 3 years for him to really start to grasp the NFL game. Thats far too long for a top 10 pick in my opinion. i'm not sure if its just our bad luck, but "stud" college DBs picked high do not seem to generate immediate returns - which should be a "given" when youre picking that high in the draft. Couple that with the fact that FS isn't even one of our top 10 team needs, and you'd have a hard time justifying picking any DB that high.

3. I'm sure they'd all be forced to start and then have matt stratford-esque seasons. No thanks. Give me Leinhart any day of the week instead. He'd come cheaper, be more experiened, and have every bit of upside that Bradford, Claussen, etc. have.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;648095][B]two things we absolutely should not do with our first round pick are:[/B]

1) [B]Draft a defensive player[/B], especially a safety. The move would not fill one of our top 10 team needs and [B]i highly doubt a safety would even be close to being the BPA on the board at 5/6[/B] or wherever we'll be picking.

2) Draft a running back before our offensive line is fixed. Its going to take 2-3 years to really fix our line. Running backs generally are only productive for 5-6 years. so if we draft a running back that high, we're essentially wasting half of his productive career behind a dismal offensive line.

We'd be far better suited [B]to trade UP to get [/B]Bradford, [B][U]Suh,[/U][/B] or Okung than we would be to make either of those moves at 5. I even have reservations about drafting a QB at 5. Any player drafted that high should be a day 1 starter and all of the QBs in this years draft are "projects." Not a one of them is NFL ready. If Shanahan is our coach, we'd be FAR better off trading our #2 for Leinhart than using our #1 on Clausen, McCoy or Bradford.

Ideally, i'd love to see us trade Campbell, our #2 (probably around 37 overall), and a conditional 2010 pick to Arizona for Leinhart and Arizona's #2 (probably around 52 overall). Then, try like hell to trade down in the 1st and pick up a 2nd round pick.

We'd have Leinhart and with our first three picks, we'd draft 2 OL and a RB.[/quote]

so we shouldn't draft a defensive player....but we should trade up for suh???

it is likely that we will have the 5th pick and to say eric berry wouldn't be the bpa for the number five pick is a little bit ruh-tard

i do agree with you on not drafting a running back that early before the line is fixed because their careers are alot shorter these days, but why would you want a qb behind a shitty line especially one like bradford with an injury history

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=mlmdub130;648109]so we shouldn't draft a defensive player....but we should trade up for suh???[/quote]

That was in reference to drafting Berry. Suh is the best player in the draft period. He'll be better than Haynesworth.


[quote=mlmdub130;648109] it is likely that we will have the 5th pick and to say eric berry wouldn't be the bpa for the number five pick is a little bit ruh-tard[/quote]

No its not. Read my other post. a college DB may appear to be a really good NFL talent, but we havent had very good luck drafting DBs that high and them playing at an NFL-level right away. Anyone we draft at 5 should not only be a starter right away, but they should also be in pro-bowl consideration their rookie year. They need to make an immediate impact.

[quote=mlmdub130;648109] i do agree with you on not drafting a running back that early before the line is fixed because their careers are alot shorter these days, but why would you want a qb behind a shitty line especially one like bradford with an injury history [/quote]

I don't. I want Leinhart behind an upgraded offensive line with a 2nd round running back. However, Drafting a QB when you have a bad OL is 1000 times smarter than drafting a RB when you have a bad line:

running backs careers are short. As I stated, we'd be wasting half the RBs career behind a bad line. By contrast, QBs can easily play for 15 years. They also generally take 2-3 years to develop. It actually makes alot of sense to draft a QB before you fix your line and then let him sit on the bench for 2-3 years so that by the time your line is fixed, the QB ready to play. It just doesnt make much sense to draft a QB in the first round when you dont have a good line AND he's not NFL ready. If you're going to select a project QB, it might as well be a later round one. Unless you really think a QB is the next peyton manning, there's not much differnece between a 1st round QB and one taken in the later rounds if theyve both spent 2-3 years on the bench. It really becomes a matter of picking a QB that has the skill set to fit the team's offensive system.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

I don't think that a top 5 pick needs to be considered for the pro-bowl their rookie year.

Why do you want Leinart so badly?

How is FS not a top 10 need of ours by the way? Are you splitting up OL five ways?

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

I wouldn't be against someone like Leinart, but only for a lower round pick. 4th or lower. He hasn't done squat to warrant much else.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;648112][B]That was in reference to drafting Berry. Suh is the best player in the draft period. He'll be better than Haynesworth.[/B]


No its not. Read my other post. [B]a college DB may appear to be a really good NFL talent, [/B][B][U]but we havent [/U][/B][B]had very good luck drafting DBs that high and them playing at an NFL-level right away[/B]. [B]Anyone we draft at 5 should not only be a starter right away, but they should also be in pro-bowl consideration their rookie year. They need to make an immediate impact.[/B]


I don't. I want Leinhart behind an upgraded offensive line with a 2nd round running back. However, [B]Drafting a QB when you have a bad OL is 1000 times smarter than drafting a RB when you have a bad line [/B]

running backs careers are short. As I stated, we'd be wasting half the RBs career behind a bad line. By contrast, QBs can easily play for 15 years. They also generally take 2-3 years to develop. [B] It actually makes alot of sense to draft a QB before you fix your line and then let him sit on the bench for 2-3 years so that by the time your line is fixed, the QB ready to play. It just doesnt make much sense to draft a QB in the first round when you dont have a good line AND he's not NFL ready. If you're going to select a project QB, it might as well be a later round one. [/B] Unless you really think a QB is the next peyton manning, there's not much differnece between a 1st round QB and one taken in the later rounds if theyve both spent 2-3 years on the bench. [B]It really becomes a matter of picking [/B]a QB that [B]has the skill set to fit the team's offensive system[/B].[/quote]


you can never say that you never truely know 100% that any one player will amount to anything in the nfl

we haven't had much luck doesn't mean much if we is gone and there is a new gm in place. and there are db's that make very smooth transitions to the nfl look at byrd this year and talib last year. in an ideal world it would be grat for all top ten picks to be pro bowlers right away but in the real world we know that is not possible

i agree 100%

again i agree, and imo i don't think any of the qb's coming out will be great starters in the nfl from jump street, there are alot of really good prospects but i wouldn't want any of them jumping behind center on this team next year

doesn't matter what postion it is they need to match our team which is somthing some one didn't used to give a f about, thankfully he is gone

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

DB's typically don't come right in and dominate as rooks. It usually takes a couple of seasons for them to hit their stride. Behind QB, CB is one of the more difficult positions to pick up in the NFL.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=Mattyk;648128]DB's typically don't come right in and dominate as rooks. It usually takes a couple of seasons for them to hit their stride. Behind QB, CB is one of the more difficult positions to pick up in the NFL.[/quote]

I agree, which is one of the reasons a team with multiple starting needs shouldnt pick one so high in the draft. Its too high a price to pay for someone who won't make an immediate impact.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;648119]I don't think that a top 5 pick needs to be considered for the pro-bowl their rookie year.

Why do you want Leinart so badly?

How is FS not a top 10 need of ours by the way? Are you splitting up OL five ways?[/quote]

I want Leinart because allegedly Shanahan likes him and i'm not overly impressed with any of the QBs in this years draft.

I would rank our top team needs in a general (but not exact) order as:

OFFENSE:
Left Tackle
Quarterback
Right Tackle
Right Guard
Center
Running Back

DEFENESE (We're likely switching to a 3-4):
Nose Tackle (if Hanyesworth plays DE)
Defensive End (2 DEs if Haynesworth plays NT)
Outside Linebacker (Opposite Orakpo)
1 - 2 Interior Linebackers
Cornerback (one to replace Rogers. 2 if Hall is gone as well)

At that point, we really need a blocking TE a FS, a backup QB and probably another WR and RB. I'd put FS first amongst those needs.

Given the weight i'm placing on all the above needs, combined with the general talent level you get drafting players at positions (you can generally find a better free safety in the 6th round than you can a Nose Tackle, DE, WR, CB, QB, RB etc.), safety is one of the last positions we need to worry about filling in the draft. We also could also consider keeping Smoot and moving him to FS as well. He certainly couldnt play the position any worse than Landry. Free agency could also get us some temporary help there, but i can't imagine any more "waste" of a top 5 pick than a free safety, given all of our other needs.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;648119]I don't think that a top 5 pick needs to be considered for the pro-bowl their rookie year.

Why do you want Leinart so badly?

How is FS not a top 10 need of ours by the way? Are you splitting up OL five ways?[/quote]

Didn't you say before on here that Shanahan would target Leinert as his QB? Are you still hearing that? I would like to have him for a low pick but if the Cards are offering him for a low pick that has to make you wonder about what they know that we don't.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

Have you heard he's interested in Leinart from any other source than here? Shanahan liked Leinart when he was available in the draft and reportedly tried to trade up for him. And there is speculation that Leinart is someone they would consider if the Cardinals make him available, which they may not.

But regardless, is making a trade for Leinart who has accomplished far less than Campbell (and is I believe the same age) really a better move than just keeping Campbell or better yet drafting a QB out of college?

It's not a lock we'll run the 3-4

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=celts32;648167]Didn't you say before on here that Shanahan would target Leinert as his QB? Are you still hearing that? I would like to have him for a low pick but if the Cards are offering him for a low pick that has to make you wonder about what they know that we don't.[/quote]

Yeah I said Shanahan liked Leinart when he was coming out of college and the rumor was (is?) he might go after him now. No definites though

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;648171]Have you heard he's interested in Leinart from any other source than here? Shanahan liked Leinart when he was available in the draft and reportedly tried to trade up for him. And there is speculation that Leinart is someone they would consider if the Cardinals make him available, which they may not.

But regardless, is making a trade for Leinart who has accomplished far less than Campbell (and is I believe the same age) really a better move than just keeping Campbell or better yet drafting a QB out of college?

[B]It's not a lock we'll run the 3-4[/B][/quote]
i definitely agree. we have no where near the personnel to run that defense. and the 49ers already tried Carter at L.B. and he was about as good as Orakpo is now( which isn't very good)

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=Texanskin;646175]if we draft Bradford..this means we didn't address the line...which means the next QB behind center in 2010 will have to be a tough SOB since the line will get you killed...Bradfords shoulder has proven this would be a MISTAKE. KEEP the tough guy Campbell..draft OL with 1st three possible picks[/quote]

Are you saying the only way to address the O line is to use our first pick to draft a linemen? I'm pretty sure we get more than 1 pick, and I believe free agency still exists. If they do draft Bradford, I hope it's not with the guarantee that he'll start on day 1. Maybe they bring in someone like Hasselback or re-sign Campbell. BUT taking a shot at QB with the first pick isn't ridiculous. The Chargers drafted Philip Rivers while Drew Brees was their QB.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;648171]Have you heard he's interested in Leinart from any other source than here? Shanahan liked Leinart when he was available in the draft and reportedly tried to trade up for him. And there is speculation that Leinart is someone they would consider if the Cardinals make him available, which they may not.

But regardless, is making a trade for Leinart who has accomplished far less than Campbell (and is I believe the same age) really a better move than just keeping Campbell or better yet drafting a QB out of college?

It's not a lock we'll run the 3-4[/quote]

No, here is my main source for hearing all that. And if i were anything other than unimpressed with this draft's QB class I would agree with you. I'd live with Bradford if we drafted him - I just think Leinhart's a less risky proposition and one that would allow us to keep more picks to address our numerous team needs. Its true that Leinhart hasn't done much, but he's done more in the NFL than any college QB and he's been pretty good in relief of Warner.

We've spent the last 8-9 years developing 1st round QBs from scratch and it hasnt worked out for us. I'd rather go with something a bit "safer" in 2010.

Regarding the 3-4, i imagine we'll know alot more about that a week from now. Even if we stick with the 4-3, i'd still put the 6 needs i listed on offense, along with a SLB and 1-2 CB's above FS in my list of team priorities. So in that case, FS would be my 9th or 10th most important team need... its a need that i could address through FA, a late round pick, or ignore entirely until 2011 and be pretty happy with my team assuming i addressed my other needs. FS and RB are the absolute last positions i'd address with a top 5 pick.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

In the 2010 draft we need to draft olineman with our first few picks, if you ask me, the only two lineman we will bring back are Rabach and Dockery, everyone else is a question mark. Fill out the oline first if it isn't addressed via free agency. A quarterback wouldn't be a terrible idea to allow the new coach to groom and possibly light a fire under Campbell if we bring him back. Then hopefully he can find a RB, CB, and FS with our day two picks.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=skins89moss;648046]wHEN YOU HAVE MAYBE THE WORST O-LINE IN THE NFL YOU CAN NOT THROW THE BALL MORE THAN 10 YARDS BECAUSE ITS A JAIL BREAK. TEAMS ARE ONLY RUSHING 4 PLAYERS AND THEY STILL CANNOT PROTECT JC. DOES THIS CLEAR THINGS UP ABOUT PASSING MORE THAN 10 YARDS DOWN THE FIELD. WHEN YOU DONT GET TIME ON A 3 STEP DROP FORGET ABOUT GOING DEEP.[/quote]

You really think that Campbell couldn't have attempted one pass of 15 yards the entire cowboy game because he didn't have time? Yeah the line blows and i mean blows but it's not as bad as Campbell makes it out to be.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=WaldSkins;648214]You really think that Campbell couldn't have attempted one pass of 15 yards the entire cowboy game because he didn't have time? Yeah the line blows and i mean blows but it's not as bad as Campbell makes it out to be.[/quote]

throwing the ball under 15 yards isn't campbell it's the wco, thats just they way it is run, thats one of the main reasons i hate it and hope we get rid of it, it's just shitty screens and making plays in space, it's not a big downfield threat

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=mlmdub130;648216]throwing the ball under 15 yards isn't campbell [B]it's the wco, thats just they way it is run, thats one of the main reasons i hate it[/B] and hope we get rid of it, it's just shitty screens and making plays in space, it's not a big downfield threat[/quote]

Whether we like it or not, you and I might as well prepare now for the Double-the-Shanahan (or Shanahan Squared, if you like) version of the WCO.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

"Most important, Shanahan completely devoured the West Coast offense. Then he added his own twists, like more deep passes"

[url=http://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/13/sports/pro-football-shanahan-dares-to-be-great.html?pagewanted=2]PRO FOOTBALL - PRO FOOTBALL; Shanahan Dares to Be Great - NYTimes.com[/url]

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;648173]Yeah I said Shanahan liked Leinart when he was coming out of college and the rumor was (is?) he might go after him now. No definites though[/quote]

If Matt Ryan is Matty Ice then Matt Leinart is definitely Matty Lite.

[IMG]http://www.supervilleband.com/uploaded_images/Matt-Leinart-Beer-Bong-701373.bmp[/IMG][IMG]http://phoenix.fanster.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/matt-leinart-girls-dirty.jpg[/IMG][IMG]http://www.insidesocal.com/tomhoffarth/archives/matt%2520leinart%2520party%2520boy.jpg[/IMG]

Not saying I wouldn't want him, but his partying habits leave something to be desired.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=mlmdub130;648216]throwing the ball under 15 yards isn't campbell it's the wco, thats just they way it is run, thats one of the main reasons i hate it and hope we get rid of it, it's just shitty screens and making plays in space, it's not a big downfield threat[/quote]

You need a QB who can run the west coast offense to though

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

I'm trying real hard to understand the, "We need a quarterback in the first couple of rounds" logic. I'm not trying to insult those of you who believe we should draft a QB, I'm just saying that I don't understand it. Campbell falls right in the middle of almost all NFL QBs statistically. If you think anyone else would have done better this year you're taking crazy pills. I'd like to have a top 5 QB too, but we have no idea what we're going to end up with. Imagine spending the next 3 years trying to groom a JaMarcus Russell. JC may not be the long term answer but he can certainly help get the Redskins through the rebuilding phase. Why don't we replace the players who suck instead of replacing the players who are average? Can anyone say, with a straight face, that we need to replace the QB before we address several line positions, at least one RB or a secondary that got us a whopping 10 interceptions so far this year? You have to take the best player in any of those three areas first. Shouldn't the horrible areas of the team be addressed before the average areas are??

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=44Deezel;648193] BUT taking a shot at QB with the first pick isn't ridiculous. The Chargers drafted Philip Rivers while Drew Brees was their QB.[/quote]

They also weren't starting 2nd and 3rd string offensive lineman and they already had a young premier running back in LT. They probably could afford to gamble on a QB.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SKINS73;648231]I'm trying real hard to understand the, "We need a quarterback in the first couple of rounds" logic. I'm not trying to insult those of you who believe we should draft a QB, I'm just saying that I don't understand it. Campbell falls right in the middle of almost all NFL QBs statistically. If you think anyone else would have done better this year you're taking crazy pills. I'd like to have a top 5 QB too, but we have no idea what we're going to end up with. Imagine spending the next 3 years trying to groom a JaMarcus Russell. JC may not be the long term answer but he can certainly help get the Redskins through the rebuilding phase. Why don't we replace the players who suck instead of replacing the players who are average? Can anyone say, with a straight face, that we need to replace the QB before we address several line positions, at least one RB or a secondary that got us a whopping 10 interceptions so far this year? You have to take the best player in any of those three areas first. Shouldn't the horrible areas of the team be addressed before the average areas are??[/quote]

If we don't think Campbell is the long term answer why not see what you can get for him now and rebuild with the QB of the future? I mean why not go through the rebuilding phase with the QB we want to rebuild with?

We shouldn't draft a offensive lineman in the first round just to say we drafted one. At at #5 if Okung isn't the guy we take then that's basically what we're doing.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

^ I actually think that with an average line and an average supporting cast Campbell might be more productive. I can't say for sure, but he deserves a chance to compete at the very least. If Okung is gone then I wouldn't mind picking up Spiller or Berry, not a QB.