Re: Who Will Be A Redskin
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;656028]I guarantee you that one of these people will be a redskin come April. I say Okung.[/quote]

Give me #76 in the 1st round
Give me #71 in the 2nd round
Give me #13 in the 4th round (I like him)

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;656309]Only thing that worries me about that is the fact that Jacksonville went 8-8 this year, add to that the fact that a good amount of people have said that Garrard and Campbell seem to be similar players and you wonder if it would just result in another mediocre year. Then again maybe we have better coaching and could do more with a similar level of talent. Of course obviously things don't exactly translate (ie if Team X did this then when we do that we'll get the same result as Team X).[/quote]

That would not be a move to win next year but for years to come. It would be possible that because it would be an upgrade and coupled with better coaching we could be alot better. But 8-8 next year would be better than most people would expect for us.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

We don't need Bradford or Clausen. We need offensive linemen! Then after we fix the line, get a QB.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=JLee9718;657600]We don't need Bradford or Clausen. We need offensive linemen! Then after we fix the line, get a QB.[/quote]

Where do we get the QB? Do we do the Gruden system where we draft every QB under the sun and hope that one of the 5 QB's that ends up on our roster develops despite lack of reps?

If we end up taking our QB in the next two years then thats one or two years worth of development we miss out on, not to mention the fact that trading up to get the QB prospect we want is probably going to cost us as much as a 2nd and 3rd round pick. Thats possibly two offensive lineman or at the very least two starters.

Do you really want to trade the farm for Jake Locker and his 58% completion percentage or Bradford and his 65%+ completion percentage? Not to mention the fact that Bradford is one of the most accurate QB's to come out of college in a long time. Did I mention that he put up huge numbers in a pro style offense as a red shirt freshman (36 TD's 8 Int's), then got a whole new system the next year only to win the Heisman?

If we're going to take a QB, then we're going to do it now. We're in as good of a position as ever and when it comes down to it we only need to find one or two QB's.

On the other hand we're going to need as many as 7 quality offensive lineman and passing on a QB of Bradfords caliber is just simply bad judegement. Okung is dominant, but the fact of the matter is Bradford is a better QB then Okung is a Tackle. My only hope is that the Rams get scared off by Bradfords shoulder and take Clausen or Suh.

In the end if you're building for the long run you take the QB now and spend four or five picks over the next two years, along with free agents, to rebuild the O-Line. Thinking you can completely fix the O-Line in one offseason is pretty far fetched.

Also before I forget just take a look at the O-Lines in the Super Bowl. You have one first round pick playing in it and he was picked at 13 (Jamaal Brown). The rest were well scouted guys that were picked after the first. The Saints for example have a 1st and 2nd at tackle, a 4th and 5th at Guard (the best Guard Tandem in the league), and a 5th at center.

The Colts have an UDFA and 4th at Tackle, Two UDFA's (including former Redskin Kyle DeVan), and an UDFA at Center. Behind those guys they have two second round picks that will probably end up taking over in the next year or two.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;659263]Where do we get the QB? Do we do the Gruden system where we draft every QB under the sun and hope that one of the 5 QB's that ends up on our roster develops despite lack of reps?

If we end up taking our QB in the next two years then thats one or two years worth of development we miss out on, not to mention the fact that trading up to get the QB prospect we want is probably going to cost us as much as a 2nd and 3rd round pick. Thats possibly two offensive lineman or at the very least two starters.

Do you really want to trade the farm for Jake Locker and his 58% completion percentage or Bradford and his 65%+ completion percentage? Not to mention the fact that Bradford is one of the most accurate QB's to come out of college in a long time. Did I mention that he put up huge numbers in a pro style offense as a red shirt freshman (36 TD's 8 Int's), then got a whole new system the next year only to win the Heisman?

If we're going to take a QB, then we're going to do it now. We're in as good of a position as ever and when it comes down to it we only need to find one or two QB's.

On the other hand we're going to need as many as 7 quality offensive lineman and passing on a QB of Bradfords caliber is just simply bad judegement. [B]Okung is dominant, but the fact of the matter is Bradford is a better QB then Okung is a Tackle.[/B] My only hope is that the Rams get scared off by Bradfords shoulder and take Clausen or Suh.

In the end if you're building for the long run you take the QB now and spend four or five picks over the next two years, along with free agents, to rebuild the O-Line. Thinking you can completely fix the O-Line in one offseason is pretty far fetched.[/quote]

On the NFL level I think that is yet to be decided. Even though Bradford has a ton of potential, he also has many more questions about his transition to the pros than Okung. I haven't seen a scouting report yet that didn't project Okung to be a starter from day one.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

Tenatively, I have the following projections on the QB class:

1. McCoy, 1st round (middle third)
2. Clausen, 1st round (middle third)
3. Bradford, 1st round (middle third)
4. Tebow, 1st round (lower third)
5. Pike, 3rd round
6. LeFevour, 3rd round
7. Kafka, 4th round
8. Zac Robinson, 4th round
9. Max Hall, 4th round
10. Jarrett Brown, 5th round
11. Bill Stull, 5th round
12. Sean Canfield, 7th round
13. Jevan Snead, priority UDFA

I don't have a grade on Skelton yet, he could be as high as No. 5, or as low as the 6th round.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

For the record, my grades last year gave me this:

1. Josh Freeman, 2nd round
2. Matt Stafford, 2nd round
3. Nate Davis, 3rd round
4. Graham Harrell, 3rd round
5. Pat White, 4th round
6. Mark Sanchez, 4th round
7. Brian Hoyer, Priority UDFA

This year's class is MUCH deeper, and generally stronger. But there's still no ideal top ten picks.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=53Fan;659268]On the NFL level I think that is yet to be decided. Even though Bradford has a ton of potential, he also has many more questions about his transition to the pros than Okung. I haven't seen a scouting report yet that didn't project Okung to be a starter from day one.[/quote]

I agree on Okung. He's definitely a starter from day 1 but to be Super Bowl contenders on an annual basis you need a franchise QB. Even the Vikings who built all the grunt positions had trouble getting anywhere without a QB. I know people are going to cite the Jets but I'll continue to insist that they were very lucky and you can't count on how they won this year to get you to the playoffs never mind the Super Bowl.

They will be very dependent next year on the development of Sanchez to be contenders otherwise they'll have to hope they get two teams that lie down in the last two weeks then play against horrible placekickers come playoff time.

One of the things though that I like about Bradford is the fact that his numbers in a pro style system as a Redshirt Freshman were better then Eli Manning coming out as a Senior. Heck they were comparable to Phillip Rivers as a senior. The guy is off the charts in everything you want in a QB except for health and thats likely to be fine in the long run. Besides Bradford likely won't play in 2010. Still the accuracy, production, and intangibles are to much to pass up on. Especially the production. Just compare him to any QB coming out in the past decade and you'll be hard pressed to find QB's that didn't go to Texas Tech with stats comprable to Bradford.

[quote=GTripp0012;659270]
This year's class is MUCH deeper, and generally stronger. But there's still no ideal top ten picks.[/quote]

Ha ha, is there even such a thing as an ideal top 10 pick at QB? Even Peyton had his doubters when he was drafted. In fact last QB I can remember that drew minimal complaints when drafted 1st overall was Michael Vick and look how that turned out.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;659271]Ha ha, is there even such a thing as an ideal top 10 pick at QB? Even Peyton had his doubters when he was drafted. In fact last QB I can remember that drew minimal complaints when drafted 1st overall was Michael Vick and look how that turned out.[/quote]The 2004 class had a few of them. No one really complained about Eli at No. 1, only about the ridiculous trade that the Giants made to get him. And Roethlisberger would not have been considered a reach at No. 2 overall, he just happened to slide a little bit.

Rivers didn't get a whole lot of draft pub that year, but it was hard to find a flaw in his game outside of his funky delivery. I don't think being ignored is the same as having major flaws.

Bradford is certainly not in the same class as those three, although I agree that he (if not McCoy) is the highest efficiency college player in the draft. Higher than Tebow, even.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

And the 2006 class certainly had top ten types. I think you could argue that they were all top ten types. Palmer in 2003 as well.

None of the 2006 picks have been managaed particularly well, despite the fact that Fisher and Whisenhunt, and to a lesser extent, Shanahan, are among they best coaches in the game.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=GTripp0012;659278]And the 2006 class certainly had top ten types. I think you could argue that they were all top ten types. Palmer in 2003 as well.

None of the 2006 picks have been managaed particularly well, despite the fact that Fisher and Whisenhunt, and to a lesser extent, Shanahan, are among they best coaches in the game.[/quote]

Lineart should be a pro-bowler by now, but his party habits have gotten the best of him. Either way this is his last chance in Arizona so we'll see how he does. Young certainly could go either way at this point. Cutler on the other hand is lost without Shanahan. We'll see if he can recapture the magic but yeah I wouldn't hold by breathe on Cutler. Sadly as it stands right now Jason Campbell is better then all 3 of those guys.

Of course Bradford will be a perennial pro bowler with us so I'm not worried :D

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;659271]I agree on Okung. He's definitely a starter from day 1[B] but to be Super Bowl contenders on an annual basis you need a franchise QB.[/B] Even the Vikings who built all the grunt positions had trouble getting anywhere without a QB. I know people are going to cite the Jets but I'll continue to insist that they were very lucky and you can't count on how they won this year to get you to the playoffs never mind the Super Bowl.

They will be very dependent next year on the development of Sanchez to be contenders otherwise they'll have to hope they get two teams that lie down in the last two weeks then play against horrible placekickers come playoff time.

One of the things though that I like about Bradford is the fact that his numbers in a pro style system as a Redshirt Freshman were better then Eli Manning coming out as a Senior. Heck they were comparable to Phillip Rivers as a senior. The guy is off the charts in everything you want in a QB except for health and thats likely to be fine in the long run. Besides Bradford likely won't play in 2010. Still the accuracy, production, and intangibles are to much to pass up on. Especially the production. Just compare him to any QB coming out in the past decade and you'll be hard pressed to find QB's that didn't go to Texas Tech with stats comprable to Bradford.



Ha ha, is there even such a thing as an ideal top 10 pick at QB? Even Peyton had his doubters when he was drafted. In fact last QB I can remember that drew minimal complaints when drafted 1st overall was Michael Vick and look how that turned out.[/quote]

Yep. Like the Dolphins were with Dan Marino? Or the Ravens with Trent Dilfer? That pretty much tells me an above average QB can win the SB with a team that excells in other areas other than QB, while a team with a "franchise " QB can't do it alone. We can win with JC, we can't with this o-line. I'll take the OT and build from there.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

I may have just joined but after reading what everyone is saying about the whole QB or OG/T debate, I think this needs to be said.

I've been an Oklahoma fan since I've been watching football and I can't express enough how good Sam Bradford really is. The second he stepped in it was almost instant that I realized we were about to have a potential NFL HOFer on our roster. Now before I get into his negatives let me clear up his positive side.

First of all a lot of people will question the style of offense that he's ran in college. This is a legitimate thought UNTILL you realize he went from a pro style offense in his early career into a spread offense where he was equally successful. My biggest worry was when Malcolm Kelly got drafted by the Redskins (PLEASE USE HIM!), but no Sam had an even better year without him and proved he can work with a smaller skill level. In my opinion he's leagues beyond Clausen in that he has handled more pressure and realizes what he has to live up to, he really does have perfect morals to bring to DC.

Now the negative part is that he has a horrible shoulder now.. The biggest thing you could say is NOBODY knows how bad it really is. Nobody on here will be able to say anything about it so let's base everything we have on him with what he's done in the past. Other than his fragile shoulder, the only thing I question is that he has been on a team that's had a great offensive line. Now don't get me wrong I have seen him show some great composure against the blitz, but I don't think that's relevant when you have dwight freeney and robert mathis pounding their way through a terrible line.

Basically my thoughts on the upcoming draft are to get Bradford assuming his shoulder has healed to atleast 85% and then focus 100% on tackles, guards and centers. I believe instead of questioning whether or not there's a legitimate QB worth our pick we should question if there's a legitimate lineman which I don't think there is. If I was Bruce or Mike I would even consider drafting a future safety star in Eric Berry before a tackle.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=IrMitchell;659320]I may have just joined but after reading what everyone is saying about the whole QB or OG/T debate, I think this needs to be said.

I've been an Oklahoma fan since I've been watching football and I can't express enough how good Sam Bradford really is. The second he stepped in it was almost instant that I realized we were about to have a potential NFL HOFer on our roster. Now before I get into his negatives let me clear up his positive side.

First of all a lot of people will question the style of offense that he's ran in college. This is a legitimate thought UNTILL you realize he went from a pro style offense in his early career into a spread offense where he was equally successful. My biggest worry was when Malcolm Kelly got drafted by the Redskins (PLEASE USE HIM!), but no Sam had an even better year without him and proved he can work with a smaller skill level. In my opinion he's leagues beyond Clausen in that he has handled more pressure and realizes what he has to live up to, he really does have perfect morals to bring to DC.

Now the negative part is that he has a horrible shoulder now.. The biggest thing you could say is NOBODY knows how bad it really is. Nobody on here will be able to say anything about it so let's base everything we have on him with what he's done in the past. Other than his fragile shoulder, the only thing I question is that he has been on a team that's had a great offensive line. Now don't get me wrong I have seen him show some great composure against the blitz, but I don't think that's relevant when you have dwight freeney and robert mathis pounding their way through a terrible line.

Basically my thoughts on the upcoming draft are to get Bradford assuming his shoulder has healed to atleast 85% and then focus 100% on tackles, guards and centers. [B]I believe instead of questioning whether or not there's a legitimate QB worth our pick we should question if there's a legitimate lineman which I don't think there is. If I was Bruce or Mike I would even consider drafting a future safety star in Eric Berry before a tackle[/B].[/quote]

welcome to the board and if we don't trade down that is the reality of the situation

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

Welcome to the board IrMitchell! I can certainly understand your affection for Bradford. I think he has the potential to be great. I'm not as certain how well he'll hold up in the NFL. There is no way I think he could take the beating JC took behind this o-line. I do think Okung is worthy of the #4 pick and could hold down the LT spot at a high level for years. I would love to have Bradford, but not at #4. The o-line was, and has been, our weak spot for longer than just last season and IMO we need to address it in a big way. In fact, I feel it should be our #1 priority. It needs surgery, not band-aids.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=IrMitchell;659320]
First of all a lot of people will question the style of offense that he's ran in college. This is a legitimate thought UNTILL you realize he went from a pro style offense in his early career into a spread offense where he was equally successful. My biggest worry was when Malcolm Kelly got drafted by the Redskins [B](PLEASE USE HIM!)[/B], but no Sam had an even better year without him and proved he can work with a smaller skill level. In my opinion he's leagues beyond Clausen in that he has handled more pressure and realizes what he has to live up to, he really does have perfect morals to bring to DC.
[/quote]

Actually the fact that Kelly has struggled so much without Bradford is a testament to how great he is as a QB.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;659328]Actually the fact that Kelly has struggled so much without Bradford is a testament to how great he is as a QB.[/quote]

True, but I think anyone who saw Kelly in college knows that he just needs some time.

But yes that's just one mans opinion. We'll see what Bruce and Mike decide but I think we can all agree on one thing that they will make the right decision.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

Bradford to Kelly in 2010's Shanahan's offense could = Cutler and Marshall in 2008's Shanahan's offense...

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

The entire offense look like shit last year, not just Kelly or Moss or Portis or so on....

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

Just because Bradford and Kelly have previous chemistry does not mean they will have immediate production, to assume that would be naive. It's also naive to believe that honestly, 2 unproven players can be Jay Cutler and Brandon Marshall. While I would welcome that (minus the interceptions of course haha) I dont expect to see anything over the top, I'd expect to see a rookie, play like a rookie.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=IrMitchell;659320]I may have just joined but after reading what everyone is saying about the whole QB or OG/T debate, I think this needs to be said.

I've been an Oklahoma fan since I've been watching football and I can't express enough how good Sam Bradford really is. The second he stepped in it was almost instant that I realized we were about to have a potential NFL HOFer on our roster. Now before I get into his negatives let me clear up his positive side.

First of all a lot of people will question the style of offense that he's ran in college. This is a legitimate thought UNTILL you realize he went from a pro style offense in his early career into a spread offense where he was equally successful. My biggest worry was when Malcolm Kelly got drafted by the Redskins (PLEASE USE HIM!), but no Sam had an even better year without him and proved he can work with a smaller skill level. In my opinion he's leagues beyond Clausen in that he has handled more pressure and realizes what he has to live up to, he really does have perfect morals to bring to DC.

[B]Now the negative part is that he has a horrible shoulder now.. The biggest thing you could say is NOBODY knows how bad it really is. Nobody on here will be able to say anything about it so let's base everything we have on him with what he's done in the past.[/B] Other than his fragile shoulder, the only thing I question is that he has been on a team that's had a great offensive line. Now don't get me wrong I have seen him show some great composure against the blitz, but I don't think that's relevant when you have dwight freeney and robert mathis pounding their way through a terrible line.

Basically my thoughts on the upcoming draft are to get Bradford assuming his shoulder has healed to atleast 85% and then focus 100% on tackles, guards and centers. I believe instead of questioning whether or not there's a legitimate QB worth our pick we should question if there's a legitimate lineman which I don't think there is. If I was Bruce or Mike I would even consider drafting a future safety star in Eric Berry before a tackle.[/quote]

Welcome to the board.

What you said is not completely true. Bradford injured his AC joint. Then he tried to come back too fast and injured it again. A lot of folks see his senior year as two injuries but really it was just one, mismanaged, injury.

The thing is, the AC joint, when allowed to heal properly, heals up completely without long-term susceptibility to injury. So if Bradford is allowed to heal, then that injury stays in his past and does not need to be accounted for in thoughts about the future. The injury he had as a senior does not indicate long-term problems.

I think Bradford's injury problems are overblown by many people. I also read today that he has already put on 16 pounds in the offseason, which should allow him to take hits better.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=Lotus;659685]Welcome to the board.

What you said is not completely true. Bradford injured his AC joint. Then he tried to come back too fast and injured it again. A lot of folks see his senior year as two injuries but really it was just one, mismanaged, injury.

The thing is, the AC joint, when allowed to heal properly, heals up completely without long-term susceptibility to injury. So if Bradford is allowed to heal, then that injury stays in his past and does not need to be accounted for in thoughts about the future. The injury he had as a senior does not indicate long-term problems.

I think Bradford's injury problems are overblown by many people. [B] I also read today that he has already put on 16 pounds in the offseason, which should allow him to take hits better[/B].[/quote]

I read that also. I'm glad to see him bulk up a little because he has looked a little frail in the past. If we do take a QB at #4, I hope Bradford is the one. He had a great sophmore year and showed a lot of NFL potential with his decision making and accuracy. I wish he could throw at the combine but the reports I've read says he won't. If we draft him, I'm going to trust the coaches really like what they see and be excited about it. But I am still pulling for us to take Okung at this point in time. :)

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

If Shanny and Allen think Bradford is the man for many years to come and is worth a 4th round pick by all means take him, BUT his ass needs to the sit the bench for a year: 1. To get that flismy shoulder at 100% heal 2. Learn Shanny's system 3. Give us time to build a good, respectable O-Line. I absolutely do not want Bradford back there with that shoulder getting killed, its a waste of a pick IMO if that is going to be the case. Looking at this draft in all honesty with the 4th pick...I dont see anyone that is a impact, great player outside of Suh...I know the draft is always a guessing game, sh*t the so called xperts are lucky to get 40%-50% right on quality legit first round talent going in the first round...ALLLLL the QBs have serious questions, Okung looks solid but is he a top 5 tackle pick or just the best tackle in this crop?...Saw Berry play 2-3 games this year, honestly not that impressed. Id prefer to trade back at this point and get these extra picks and get guys who fit Shanny's system.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

Bradford is a system QB, like Leinart, and might not do so well when the odds are even(meaning matchups between the offense and defense). It is easy to look great beating up the likes of Tulsa and the rest of the Big 12 "undercards". Throw in the fact that the Big 12 is 50+ pt central in Div IA ball and you get the drift. Bradford's injury is probably indeed blown out of proportion, but so to is his career. Yeah the stats don't lie, but you have to throw into account the competitve level and other factors. My point? Look at the Sooners in the bowl game, that Jones kid came in and did a rather nice job and the Sooners got a nice victory to cap the year. Jones taking the reins next year will probably also look like another QB god.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;659328]Actually the fact that Kelly has struggled so much without Bradford is a testament to how great he is as a QB.[/quote]


Dude the reason Kelly is struggling is: 1. The Skins offense stunk last year
2. Oklahoma is a NCAA powerhouse


THe SKins offense was horrid last season until the season was effectively scrapped and Lewis came in to call plays. Kelly without Bradford means a hill of beans. Kelly struggled in the light of the Skins' offensive woes. Also come on, in NCAA Div I football, the offense still has a clear speed advantage over the Dbs. Couple that with the fact that Bradford/Kelly played on Oklahoma, a college football superpower that is head and shoulders superior to 90% of its opponents makes it easy for great players to look like All Americans. That is a reason why a lot of these preseason hype jobs struggle in the NFL. In the NFL there is a lot more parity, especially in one to one matchups every Sunday. The question you should be asking is whether Bradford is going to struggle playing on a level playing field. In fact, he will be playing to a slight disadvantage with the Skins. This is the reason why I keep pushing Kafka along with Lefevour. Kafka is my fav since he was the Northwestern offense. He excelled without a stacked team like Bradford, and didn't get hurt in a conference known for tough D. Guy is fast on his feet and isn't afraid of taking it in himself when the need arises. I would take Stull or even Canfield from Oregon St before Bradford. It is these under the radar guys that turn into nice surprises.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

I agree with Chico23231, what it all boils down to is having faith in the coaching staff and Front office to make the right choice for the future of the organization as a whole. I back the selection of Bradford with the 4th pick, however, even with all the added pressure on rookie QB's these days; sitting him for a year would be a damn good idea. And im sure we'll have a top 20 pick next year (assuming there is not a lockout) so we can address the offensive line issue even further via the 2011 draft.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

I thought this was interesting but not new thread worthy:

Suh signed with Nike:
[url=http://www.cnbc.com/id/35224728]Sports Biz Blog — Nike Inks Ex-Nebraska Defensive Lineman Ndamukong Suh - CNBC[/url]

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;659328]Actually the fact that Kelly has struggled so much without Bradford is a testament to how great he is as a QB.[/quote]

This is probably one of the single most ridiculous statements ive ever read on this forum. How bout the fact that Kelly has struggled so much is a testament to how much BIGGER a jump it is from being a college WR (not always playin the best competition) to NFL WR (face the best week in and week out) You don't have to be a good route runner in college to be a good WR. Hell, Kelly has sub par speed but even he blew past ppl in college. He can't do that in the pros. THATS why he's strugglin. Kelly does have amazing hands. McCardell/Shanahans will be far more instrumental in how much he progresses this year than a Sam Bradford would.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=PHazard;660405][B]This is probably one of the single most ridiculous statements ive ever read on this forum.[/B] How bout the fact that Kelly has struggled so much is a testament to how much BIGGER a jump it is from being a college WR (not always playin the best competition) to NFL WR (face the best week in and week out) You don't have to be a good route runner in college to be a good WR. Hell, Kelly has sub par speed but even he blew past ppl in college. He can't do that in the pros. THATS why he's strugglin. Kelly does have amazing hands. McCardell/Shanahans will be far more instrumental in how much he progresses this year than a Sam Bradford would.[/quote]


WTF??? You have been on here no longer 3.5 days? F off.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

[quote=PHazard;660405]This is probably one of the single most ridiculous statements ive ever read on this forum.[/quote]

You must be joking. Hyperbole is not your friend.

Re: 57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins
 

Maybe i was a lil harsh with the "most ridiculous" comment i made. Ive been on this forum along time, just didnt choose to join till now. But either way, i dont have to be on here longer than 3.5 days to KNOW football, i dont have to be on here longer than 3.5 days to know that Malcolm Kelly is in a completely different league than he was with Oklahoma. Ive been to games and seen Malcolm Kelly go the ENTIRE game without getting open once. He just doesn't get separation from CB's. So it doesnt matter if its Bradford, JC, Brennan, Cutler, JESUS, or Peyton Manning (okay, maybe peyton could lol), if Kelly can't start running routes like an NFL receiver, he's not gon catch alot of balls from anyone.