Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=bdubin;660701]Bradford is a bust!!!!!![/quote]

Excellent and inciting (spelling is correct) response. The depth of your analysis, and support of proposition is so complete as to be completely irrefutable. You have proven your case beyond any reasonable person's ability to dissuade you. BDubin, you get my vote as our next GM


[/sarcasm]

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;660705]Excellent and inciting (spelling is correct) response. The depth of your analysis, and support of proposition is so complete as to be completely irrefutable. You have proven your case beyond any reasonable person's ability to dissuade you. BDubin, you get my vote as our next GM


[/sarcasm][/quote]

Dude, don't make fun of him. His post was peer reviewed.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;660564]Sam Bradford had Jauqin Igeliasis (3rd Rounder), Manuel Johnson (7th rounder), Brian Broyles (Jr. Will probably be a first rounder, definite second rounder) and Jerhmain Greisham (projected first rounder)

I think you got to go with Bradford because he was able to do the most with the poorer quality receivers. Watching a lot of Clausen highlights, there were a lot of times that he would under or over throw Tate, and Tate would somehow come up with the ball. Bradford, would put the ball where his receivers would be the only ones to get it. Other than greisham, bradford didn't have that many good receivers, and was able to get the ball to the receivers and not make them have to adjust for it nearly as much as Clausen.

Let's get Sam.[/quote]

The legend of Sam Bradford grows.
BTW-You forgot Malcolm Kelly and an near NFL caliber OL.
You also forgot that the QB friendly system OU runs allowed Landry Jones to step in and put up some good numbers too.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

30 gut has got it. Stoops has a system that you can put in any above average college QB into and he will produce. I don't think Olkahoma's Wr corp was so bad either. That is why if we do go for a Q we go for a second tier one that performed well on a team on par with its competition. Florida or Oklahoma did play a few top opponents, but padded their schedule with the typcial patsies. On top of that the major conferences had an off year in terms of real strong intra conference competition. Ohio State ran away with the Big Ten, Bama with the SEC, and Tex with the Big 12. Only the Pac 10 had a few teams in the running for the title with 2-3 weeks left in the season.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=30gut;661005]The legend of Sam Bradford grows.
BTW-You forgot Malcolm Kelly and an near NFL caliber OL.
You also forgot that the QB friendly system OU runs allowed Landry Jones to step in and put up some good numbers too.[/quote]

First off, Kelly and Bradford played for 1 year together, I'm referring to SB redshirt sophomore year only. He had two, maybe three if you count duke robinson starters on his OL, so your statement also holds true, but at the same time, the Big 12 always has good pass rushers and defenses so it's not like the Oline wasn't battle tested or invincible. I wouldn't say that it was a QB friendly system at OU, because its not like a Florida or texas tech or hawaii QB friendly offense, He plays every down with a RB and TE in every formation and occasionally a FB, which to me means its a pro style offense such as what New England and Indy run. If I had to put Clausen and Bradford head to head in the whose offense is more QB friendly, then yeah, I'd go Bradford, but in general I think people really overstate OU's offense as a 'typical college' offense. Plus if you watch bradford, QB friendly or not, he puts the ball where only his receivers can get it, and threads the needle between defenders. His very accurate which is something every coach loves about a QB.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Before we go off the wall on Bradford, can someone remind me of a player who missed either their last year of college ball with injury, or their first year of pro ball with injury (the qualifying factor is the practice time...were they unable to practice most of the year?), and went on to acheive great success.

I'm not talking about relative success at a position...that's what we already have at the QB position. I'm talking about unquestionable, best of era (or in the discussion) at their position. Made a lot of pro bowls early?

I'm sure if we go back far enough, said player exists. I just can't think of the last one who, like Sam Bradford, basically didn't practice all year after the BYU game, and went on and didn't skip a beat, continuing on at the next level as if the injury year simply never happened.

The first two years of Bradford's college career suggest a player that was destined for NFL stardom. The most critical year leaves us with a player that is, at best, injury prone, and at worst, too unrefined to make the jump. The question is: which NFL comparable would help me reconcile the two "careers" Sam Bradford had. I have statistical comparables, but they suggest simple mediocrity. I'm looking for something more relevant to the player himself.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Bradford basically didn't practice after the second injury in mid-October against Texas, after BYU (save for a few days off) he was still practicing, albeit limited on some days.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;661014]First off, Kelly and Bradford played for 1 year together, I'm referring to SB redshirt sophomore year only. He had two, maybe three if you count duke robinson starters on his OL, so your statement also holds true, but at the same time, the Big 12 always has good pass rushers and defenses so it's not like the Oline wasn't battle tested or invincible. I wouldn't say that it was a QB friendly system at OU, because its not like a Florida or texas tech or hawaii QB friendly offense, He plays every down with a RB and TE in every formation and occasionally a FB, which to me means its a pro style offense such as what New England and Indy run. If I had to put Clausen and Bradford head to head in the whose offense is more QB friendly, then yeah, I'd go Bradford, but in general I think people really overstate OU's offense as a 'typical college' offense. Plus if you watch bradford, QB friendly or not, he puts the ball where only his receivers can get it, and threads the needle between defenders. His very accurate which is something every coach loves about a QB.[/quote]

Look dude, i got nothing against Bradford.
But people are starting to talk this dude up as some sort of can't miss prospect by downing the other QBs and the level of competition and system etc..
Bradford has many of the same flaws as the other QBs you mention.
I'm not saying that OU running a QB friendly offense is a knock just that its in the same category as Texas, Florida, WVU etc. Also, how can you deny that OU runs a QB friendly offense when freshmen Landry Jones steps in after Bradfords injury and puts up some good numbers himself 3,198 yds 26 TDs.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

I just don't see Shanny and Allen drafting Bradford. 15 pounds of muscle isn't going to turn him into a rocket-arm like Elway or Cutler. I mean even healthy he doesn't seem like the guy...add the serious injury concerns and it just doesn't fit.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[QUOTE=30gut;661040]Look dude, i got nothing against Bradford.
But people are starting to talk this dude up as some sort of can't miss prospect by downing the other QBs and the level of competition and system etc..
Bradford has many of the same flaws as the other QBs you mention.
I'm not saying that OU running a QB friendly offense is a knock just that its in the same category as Texas, Florida, WVU etc. [B]Also, how can you deny that OU runs a QB friendly offense when freshmen Landry Jones steps in after Bradfords injury and puts up some good numbers himself 3,198 yds 26 TDs.[/[/B]QUOTE]

It's called getting good recruits, which Bob Stoops does year in and year out. No one had Paul Thompson as a great NFL QB when he was at OU a few years ago.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=30gut;661005]The legend of Sam Bradford grows.
BTW-You forgot Malcolm Kelly and an near NFL caliber OL.
You also forgot that the QB friendly system OU runs allowed Landry Jones to step in and put up some good numbers too.[/quote]

And you're forgetting the pro style system Bradford ran his freshman year where he put up 3,100 yard 36 TD's and 8 Int's. And Malcolm Kelly hasn't done much lately to prove that he wasn't a product of good QB play.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=GTripp0012;661019]Before we go off the wall on Bradford, [B]can someone remind me of a player who missed either their last year of college ball with injury, or their first year of pro ball with injury (the qualifying factor is the practice time...were they unable to practice most of the year?), and went on to acheive great success.[/B]
[/quote]

maybe i'm forgetting someone but can you remind me of someone who missed their last year of college fb and then was a top five pick in the draft

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

I'd also like to point out the irony that Shanahan runs a QB friendly system.

[QUOTE]"You have to be accurate," Shanahan said. "You have to be passionate. You have to love what you're doing and study the game inside-out. Some guys are talkers; others are quiet. I've seen people lead in a lot of different ways. ... But you have to have a burning desire to be the best you can."

Read more at the Washington Examiner: [url=http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/sports/For-Campbell_-future-is-uncertain-8734925-80964952.html#ixzz0esVtsn9p]For Campbell, future is uncertain | Washington Examiner[/url][/QUOTE]

Bradford is easily the most accurate QB in this draft.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=mlmdub130;661107]maybe i'm forgetting someone but can you remind me of someone who missed their last year of college fb and then was a top five pick in the draft[/quote]Jason Allen, the University of Tennessee safety (drafted by the Dolphins), was picked somewhere between 16-18 in 2006, and hasn't produced like a first round pick.

Antonio Cromartie was picked in roughly the same range the same year. He's got a pro bowl appearance. But he's had an up and down career.

Neither of those guys were top five picks, but that was probably as much about being defensive backs as being injured. Darrelle Revis, for example, was the 14th overall pick in 2007. People knew he was great at the time, but it's tough to justify a top ten pick on a DB unless you know he's going to be THIS good. Ed Reed was the 23rd? overall pick in 2002.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

^I'm still a little sketch on Berry, but I do think he is an upgrade over Horton/Landry. But not worth us taking with our first round pick

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Per Adam Schefter:

[quote]The two starting offensive lines have no first-round picks and three undrafted free agents, all from Indianapolis. In fact, the highest drafted offensive line starter in Super Bowl XLIV will be Saints right tackle Jonathan Stinchcomb, whom New Orleans drafted out of Georgia in 2003 with the 37th overall pick. Otherwise, each team's offensive line is filled with scrap-heap pieces that few wanted.

Saints left tackle Jermon Bushrod was drafted out of Towson State University in 2007 with the 125th overall pick, left guard Carl Nicks was drafted out of Nebraska in 2008 with the 164th overall pick, center Jonathan Goodwin was drafted out of Michigan in 2002 with the 154th overall pick, right guard Jahri Evans was drafted out of Division II Bloomsburg in 2006 with the 108th overall pick, and Stinchbomb rounds out the Saints' offensive line.

The Colts' offensive line was even less touted, if that's possible. Left tackle Charlie Johnson was drafted out of Oklahoma State in 2006 with the 199th overall pick; left guard Ryan Lilja was claimed off waivers from the Chiefs in 2004, after he was an undrafted free agent from Kansas State; center Jeff Saturday was an undrafted free agent from North Carolina whom the Ravens released; right guard Kyle DeVan was an undrafted free agent from Oregon State whom the Redskins and Jets waived; and right tackle Ryan Diem was drafted out of Northern Illinois in 2001 with the 118th overall pick. Let this be a lesson as teams attempt to rebuild their offensive lines this offseason.[/quote]

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Nice post, Dirtbag! Colts and Saints may have been smart with their O-line men.. Although, this is not something we can say about our Redskins FO.. Well, that might be until Allen and Shanahan came in.. But once again, they haven't started anything yet.. So, all we can do is either (1) assume that FO will continue the same trend that has been going on for years, which is not being smart with O-line.. (2) Or we have to wait until maybe two years later, to determine whether if Allen/Shanahan are being smart with O-line..

Given the both scenarios; I still think the smart move would be to draft Okung or trade down and draft a LT.. This move would help our offense a lot..

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

If we do go the "develop a prospect" route at QB I see Zac Robinson as a great fit. Apparently the rumor is that Shanahan would want someone who took a hit to their draft stock, but was originally projected much higher during preseason. Robinson has the zip on his throws to get the ball downfield, accurate, mobile, played under center, and he's played against strong competition.

Personally I don't see the appeal in McCoy. His arm is way to weak, especially on throws like deep outs and he has a tendency to leave receivers high and dry. Maybe the Shanahan's, especially Kyle, will see something and take a flyer but personally I don't see it, in fact I think he's way to similar to Colt Brenan, who obviously is already on our roster.

Pike doesn't have the worlds greatest production but his numbers are solid. He also has the type of build that reminds me of Matt Schuab. Still the lack of experience under center is a pretty big concern.

LeFevoure is a personal favorite, given that he's a MAC QB with great numbers.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Saints drafted Jamaal Brown 13th overall in 2005. He didn't play at all this year, which supports the notion that the left tackle position is overvalued compared to the other positions on the OL, particularly RT. But the Saints got where they are by investing a first and a second round pick in tackles over the last seven drafts, but more directly, by digging up the very best lineman available in the middle rounds, at positions where the draft value system dictates that great players are available if you look in places like Bloomsburg, and Towson State.

Even though the backup LT, Bushrod, was undrafted, the Saints didn't try to live off the middle rounds in the building of the OL. The fact that their interior line actually IS built of middle rounders, which it is, is possible in part because they were able to take college OTs and work them at a new position because they had already developed the two bookends.

In essence, when we had an effective Samuels and Jansen for the forseeable future, the line was our strength. We chose to invest heavily in Randy Thomas back in 2003 because we were working with a crappy interior OL at the time, which was a fine start, and then Dockery and Rabach worked because they were functional pieces in a strong unit that hadn't been skimped on. Kendall, to an extent, was the same principle. But once the cornerstones of our line began to decline, those interior players were exposed.

I don't think that's perfectly analogous to the Saints, because Nicks and Goodwin are strong players in their own right, certainly better than Rabach and Dockery, and helped solve the issue of having a replacement LT this year. But if the Saints OL success is sustainable, I'd imagine that Jamaal Brown is going to be a big part of it.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

I must admit that as time goes by the thought of drafting Bradford does get me excited. I think he has what it takes to be a very, very good QB. But then with the annoucement of Russ Grimm going into the HOF, I think again of how much we need a good OL. I read somewhere about how amazing it is that JC's numbers went up playing behind possibly one of the worse OL's in history. With the Hogs, it really didn't matter that we didn't have a franchise QB. And behind the Hogs, even someone like Timmy Smith could run for over 200 yards in the Super Bowl. How much better would JC be, or one of our RB's be running behind a great o-line? It would be nice for the first time in a long time, to be strong in the trenches so we could really know how strong our skill positions really are. I'm so tired of our o-line sucking and our QB getting eaten alive. Maybe it's all the talk about the Hogs lately.....I just wish we could be strong up front once again instead of being a joke.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=GTripp0012;662075]Saints drafted Jamaal Brown 13th overall in 2005. He didn't play at all this year, which supports the notion that the left tackle position is overvalued compared to the other positions on the OL, particularly RT. But the Saints got where they are by investing a first and a second round pick in tackles over the last seven drafts, but more directly, by digging up the very best lineman available in the middle rounds, at positions where the draft value system dictates that great players are available if you look in places like Bloomsburg, and Towson State.

Even though the backup LT, Bushrod, was undrafted, the Saints didn't try to live off the middle rounds in the building of the OL. The fact that their interior line actually IS built of middle rounders, which it is, is possible in part because they were able to take college OTs and work them at a new position because they had already developed the two bookends.

In essence, when we had an effective Samuels and Jansen for the forseeable future, the line was our strength. We chose to invest heavily in Randy Thomas back in 2003 because we were working with a crappy interior OL at the time, which was a fine start, and then Dockery and Rabach worked because they were functional pieces in a strong unit that hadn't been skimped on. Kendall, to an extent, was the same principle. But once the cornerstones of our line began to decline, those interior players were exposed.

I don't think that's perfectly analogous to the Saints, because Nicks and Goodwin are strong players in their own right, certainly better than Rabach and Dockery, and helped solve the issue of having a replacement LT this year. But if the Saints OL success is sustainable, I'd imagine that Jamaal Brown is going to be a big part of it.[/quote]

Excellent post. If I understand you correctly Brown is basically being groomed to start at LT?

Per the Schefter article, well, he's ignoring the fact the Saints, and more so the Colts, are exceptional in their oline compilation. The best lines in football, including the Jets, Vikes, and Giants are mostly comprised of high draft choices. I see a lot of wisdom in drafting lineman high as well as looking for the underrated talent in the middle rounds. Research aside, my ocular assessment ;) is the bust risk is significantly lower for high-drafted offensive lineman than compared to most other positions, especially WR and QB.

I also find it interesting DT seems like a fairly solid high draft choice while defensive ends seems to bust maybe half the time.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=The Goat;662101]Excellent post. If I understand you correctly Brown is basically being groomed to start at LT?
[/quote]

Groomed? The guy is a 28 year old with two pro bowls under his belt. He's been a mainstay on their line since his rookie year in 2005. If anything he's there, no further grooming required. Tripp was pointing out that if the Saints were going to start a dynasty that he would expect Brown being a big part of the teams long term success.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=The Goat;662101]Excellent post. If I understand you correctly Brown is basically being groomed to start at LT?[/quote]I was more pointing out that the Saints have all of their OL salary invested in their two tackles. Brown was the guy who was hurt and couldn't play this year.

The interior of the line includes two guys on their rookie contract at guards, and a center on a very modest second contract who was picked up from the Jets and moved inside. He was signed as a backup actually, and New Orleans let both of their two other Centers (Bentley, then Faine) walk before handing the job to Goodwin in 2008. He appears to have been groomed by the team.

It's due to good drafting, primarily, that NO was able to play Bushrod at LT this year and still win the super bowl. He's not a different player than Stephon Heyer is for us. He would have been a complete disaster here forced into the same role. But the Saints were strong across the board at OL due to good recent drafting, and because they are getting Brown back next year (even though his contract situation starts to become an issue), they don't really have to "build" the lines, or try Carl Nicks at left tackle (and then play an inferior LG).

They treated Bushrod all year like an undrafted replacement player, the very same guy that the Redskins wouldn't have been caught dead playing in the Gibbs era, and won the super bowl with him, and not only that, let their offensive line lead them there.

We have salary locked up in the tackle position still, but it's mostly dead salary, especially if Samuels is indeed done. Restructuring that position so that the guaranteed $ there goes towards paying for future talent instead of past talent has to be priority #1.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;659062]The NFL is a QB league, if we can get a franchise QB, we've got to get him. If we look at the Conference championships, who are the QBs; Manning, Brees, Favre, Sanchez (#1 D, #1 Rushing O). Look at the division round; Warner, Rivers, Flacco (excellent D, excellent run game), Romo (Cowpuke, he just sucks and is the exception). So unless a team can build a dominant defense and develop a dominant running game, a franchise-type QB is needed to win in the playoffs.

The only franchise QB in this draft IMO is Clausen. If STL grabs him, then we definitely go OL or trade down and get even more OL and help elsewhere.[/quote]
Yep; QB is the one spot it's okay to reach a bit. If you hesitate to draft one because the spot is too high you'll rarely draft one.. and you'll have high draft picks quite a bit most likely. Unless you really see enough intangibles out of a later pick that you know that you can groom him, you might as well take one of the big boys it seems, unless you're fairly certain you'll be in place to draft someone you're more interested in the next year and are certain you can land him. There are always busts but that's just the risk you have to take. Either that or you can just stay forever satisfied with questionable QB play, something I'd rather put behind us.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=tryfuhl;662117]Yep; QB is the one spot it's okay to reach a bit. If you hesitate to draft one because the spot is too high you'll rarely draft one.. and you'll have high draft picks quite a bit most likely. Unless you really see enough intangibles out of a later pick that you know that you can groom him, you might as well take one of the big boys it seems, unless you're fairly certain you'll be in place to draft someone you're more interested in the next year and are certain you can land him. There are always busts but that's just the risk you have to take. Either that or you can just stay forever satisfied with questionable QB play, something I'd rather put behind us.[/quote]Devil's Advocate:

If you're at No. 4, and you're reaching for a QB prospect who is value-wise, in the 11-20 range on a big board...what exactly is the pick designed to net you.

I mean, if you're getting a top five type, that's not a reach at all. If you're not getting a top ten type...it's hardly an ambitious move. It seems foolhardy.

But what about that grey area in between. In five years, what if one of the guys who will be available at No. 4 is going to be a top ten quarterback. Which is to say, he's not better than Campbell now, but in four seasons (assuming there is still football), he's good enough to net some pro bowls if a guy drops out. Like say, Matt Schaub or Carson Palmer. Would that be a reach, or a pick at value? And furthermore, would it be worth it (if a crystal ball could confirm that you weren't getting a player who would ever be top five at his position).

Essentially though, there are 25ish franchise quarterbacks in this league, and a lot of them do a lot of losing. So, perhaps it's not a quarterback league after all.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

I found this interesting. Especially since only 2 QB's were sacked more than JC last year, (Thanks Vinny), and our DC the last couple of years didn't consider sacks very important.

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=4828380]NFL: Sack differential growing in importance - ESPN[/url]

I'm really happy we've made some changes in the way this team will be run this year. HTTR!!!

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

hopefully we can find a trading partner to trade down. theres not that great a difference between the top OL in the draft and ones that will be available in the bottom of round 1 and the top of round 2. None of the OL in this draft strike me as top 5 material. Also, as many have noted, neither of the "top" QBs in this draft are top 10 material. If we're stuck at 4, we'd be much better off in the long run drafting BPA than reaching for Bradford or Clausen. Atleast, thats how things look now. Alot can - and will - change over the next 2 months to affect players draft stock.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;662048]If we do go the "develop a prospect" route at QB I see Zac Robinson as a great fit. Apparently the rumor is that Shanahan would want someone who took a hit to their draft stock, but was originally projected much higher during preseason. Robinson has the zip on his throws to get the ball downfield, accurate, mobile, played under center, and he's played against strong competition.

Personally I don't see the appeal in McCoy. His arm is way to weak, especially on throws like deep outs and he has a tendency to leave receivers high and dry. Maybe the Shanahan's, especially Kyle, will see something and take a flyer but personally I don't see it, in fact I think he's way to similar to Colt Brenan, who obviously is already on our roster.

Pike doesn't have the worlds greatest production but his numbers are solid. He also has the type of build that reminds me of Matt Schuab. Still the lack of experience under center is a pretty big concern.

LeFevoure is a personal favorite, given that he's a MAC QB with great numbers.[/quote]


How about Jevan Snead. A lot of people were predicting he would be the first qb taken in this draft, he has all the prototypical pocket passer attributes, and if there's anyone who could rebuild his confidence and work on his decision making skills its Mike Shanahan (see Jay Cutler). If he's around in the 4th round (which he very well could be) he could end up being the steal of this draft.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=r08kessl;662213]How about Jevan Snead. [B]A lot of people were predicting he would be the first qb taken in this draft[/B], he has all the prototypical pocket passer attributes, and if there's anyone who could rebuild his confidence and work on his decision making skills its Mike Shanahan (see Jay Cutler). If he's around in the 4th round (which he very well could be) he could end up being the steal of this draft.[/quote]

Where did you get this info? I believe whole lot of people are predicting that either Bradford or Clausen will be the first QB to be taken..

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=r08kessl;662213]How about Jevan Snead. A lot of people were predicting he would be the first qb taken in this draft, he has all the prototypical pocket passer attributes, and if there's anyone who could rebuild his confidence and work on his decision making skills its Mike Shanahan (see Jay Cutler). If he's around in the 4th round (which he very well could be) he could end up being the steal of this draft.[/quote]

I can't stress this enough. I watched him play many times.

Snead sucks donkey balls.

IMO

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=GridIron26;662214]Where did you get this info? I believe whole lot of people are predicting that either Bradford or Clausen will be the first QB to be taken..[/quote]

Going into the 2009 season, a lot of people thought Snead was in a position to play himself into the #1 overall pick. He was very underwhelming though, and I think he made a mistake going pro this year.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Before this year Snead was considered easily a first round pick....

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Snead had a terrible year. But he's got a low of raw talent. Someone will take a chance on him somewhere between the 3rd and 5th round. That someone could [I]could[/I] be Shanallenahan.

When he year started Snead was projected much higher, first round even

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=GridIron26;662214]Where did you get this info? I believe whole lot of people are predicting that either Bradford or Clausen will be the first QB to be taken..[/quote]

He was projected to be a first round QB before the ncaa college football season had begun.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

I see.. Well, I don't usually look into those kind of stuff because many things can happen through out a season..

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=SmootSmack;662221]Snead had a terrible year. But he's got a low of raw talent. Someone will take a chance on him somewhere between the 3rd and 5th round. That someone could [I]could[/I] be Shanallenahan.

When he year started Snead was projected much higher, first round even[/quote]

Snead scares me. Sure he has a lot of great physical tools, and the poor mechanics make you think that maybe if you improve the mechanics you can improve everything else, but I keep on hearing that he has a lot of trouble reading defenses and that is a deal breaker in my mind.

Personally I would much rather have Zac Robinson. However then again why go after a QB half cocked? Why not go after the best prospects available in the first round?

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;662247]Snead scares me. Sure he has a lot of great physical tools, and the poor mechanics make you think that maybe if you improve the mechanics you can improve everything else, but I keep on hearing that he has a lot of trouble reading defenses and that is a deal breaker in my mind.

Personally I would much rather have Zac Robinson. However then again why go after a QB half cocked? Why not go after the best prospects available in the first round?[/quote]I think because the need on the depth chart exceeds the need on the field. There's just not much (if anything at all) behind Campbell.

To me, the argument for taking BQBA at #4 is entirely different from the one at taking BQBA at #173 (or whatever). We wouldn't be addressing the same need.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=SmootSmack;662221]Snead had a terrible year. But he's got a low of raw talent. Someone will take a chance on him somewhere between the 3rd and 5th round. That someone could [I]could[/I] be Shanallenahan.

When he year started Snead was projected much higher, first round even[/quote]Generally speaking, I would expect players who are supremely skilled to have their talent show through at the college level at some point, even if inconsistently over a career. Based on the available evidence, which includes a disappointing transfer, a wildly inconsistent debut season at Ole Miss, followed by a terribly disappointing one, I have only to conclude that Snead is either really, really unlucky, or not very talented.

By coming out early, he leaves that dualism unanswered, which is probably his best bet to get drafted.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=53Fan;662079]I must admit that as time goes by the thought of drafting Bradford does get me excited. I think he has what it takes to be a very, very good QB. But then with the annoucement of Russ Grimm going into the HOF, I think again of how much we need a good OL. I read somewhere about how amazing it is that JC's numbers went up playing behind possibly one of the worse OL's in history. With the Hogs, it really didn't matter that we didn't have a franchise QB. And behind the Hogs, even someone like Timmy Smith could run for over 200 yards in the Super Bowl. How much better would JC be, or one of our RB's be running behind a great o-line? It would be nice for the first time in a long time, to be strong in the trenches so we could really know how strong our skill positions really are. I'm so tired of our o-line sucking and our QB getting eaten alive. Maybe it's all the talk about the Hogs lately.....I just wish we could be strong up front once again instead of being a joke.[/quote]

QB is the most important position on the field. If Shanahan and Allen think Bradford is that good and can be let's say what Brees is then they simply have to take him, regardless of the situation with the line.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

I think we should trade away the pick -- one of these guys will be there later in the round