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

[quote=Dirtbag359;666826]Landry Jones did play well. But saying that Jones played just as well is a huge slap in the face to just how well Bradford was at the collegiate level. I mean you're talking about a Heisman winner and comparing him to a guy who wasn't even close to being a Heisman fianlist. Lets start with accuracy:

[B]Landry Jones: 58% in the spread
Sam Bradford: 67% in the spread 2008, 69% Pro Style Offense 2007

Landry Jones QB Rating: 130.83
Sam Bradford: 180.4 in the spread 2008, 176.52 in the pro style offense

Landry Jones TD Passes to Int's: 26 TD's 14 ints
Sam Bradford: 50 TD's 8 Ints 2008, 36 TD's 8 Ints 2007
(granted Landry Jones started less games due to the games Bradford did play but even then it would still be hard for him to compensate by throwing 24 TD's in 1.5 games or 10 for that matter)

Landry Jones Yards: 3,198 yards
Sam Bradford: 4,720 yards in 2008, 3,121 yards in 2007
[/B]
To put it in NFL terms saying that Landry Jones even came close to matching Bradford production wise is like saying that 2009 Jason Campbell played almost as well as 2007 Tom Brady. (Landry Jones NFL QB rating: 86, Sam Bradford 126 in 2008, 123 in 2007).

When you compare theres just no comparison. So no more crazy talk about Landry = Bradford, Cult :D



It's unfortunate that it has pretty much taken the fact that we now will want what we can't have for some people to realize just how much of a prospect Bradford is. Still I knew it was pretty much sealed when I heard that Bradford weighed in at 236.

I mean I know the numbers at the combine only mean so much but so much of the skeptism towards Bradford has been due to that shoulder, where if you listen to some non-doctor posters is practically hanging by a string, and the lanky frame that couldn't possibly stand up to the beating that our line (which apparently is going to be the exact same of last year) will cause Bradford to go through. 236 pounds with most of the weight gained being muscle is overkill. Actually makes me wonder if he could stand more hits now then Big Ben.

By the way Smootsmack stop trying to circumvent our swear filter. You know Spread is a dirty word. I'm disgraced to have you as a mod.[/quote]

A) Where did you get these Stats?
B) Why is it when I'm all for Bradford I get a majority of people here bashing me for wanting a QB when we should get OLineman, and when I don't want Bradford I get people wanting to get Bradford and sticking up for him?



I can't wait for FA and the draft....

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

[quote=CultBrennan59;666889]A) Where did you get these Stats?
B) Why is it when I'm all for Bradford I get a majority of people here bashing me for wanting a QB when we should get OLineman, and when I don't want Bradford I get people wanting to get Bradford and sticking up for him?



I can't wait for FA and the draft....[/quote]

What do you mean where did I get these stats. It's available on ESPN. I mean sure I rounded down some of the numbers but you'll find them here.

[url=http://espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=377845]Landry Jones Stats, News, Photos - Oklahoma Sooners - NCAA College Football - ESPN[/url]
[url=http://espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=188934]Sam Bradford Stats, News, Photos - Oklahoma Sooners - NCAA College Football - ESPN[/url]

I just want to put an end to this madness that somehow Landry Jones played on the same level as Bradford therefore Bradford is a system QB that benefited from being around top recruiting talent. The two aren't even in the same solar system.

Also just to clarify Oklahoma switched to a spread offense in 2008.

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

It seems to me that the Redskins are in a catch 22. Or should we call it catch 4-12. Their quarterback didn't play well enough for them to win more than 4 games but their offensive line was so horrible that the quarterback wasn't able to play any better.

So I look at it this way...

I haven't seen one person that has said Washington had a good line. I would like to see someone argue that they had an average line. Good offenses have good offensive lines. Even the people who played on the line said they were bad (Mike Williams interview).

Washington has a proven formula that great lines can turn average quarterbacks into Super Bowl MVPs, so as much as everyone says we need a "franchise quarterback" I disagree. Conversely, a bad line can turn a franchise QB into a bum.

Pass on Bradford and commit to our proven formula.

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

Schefter's usually spot on so I think Clausen would be there when we pick, but O-line is the most pressing need. Honestly I think the FO is blowing smoke to get out of #4 and let a team who [B]really[/B] needs a QB (Broncos, Panthers, Browns) to get Clausen. In the end we'll trade down and get Davis or Campbell.

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

This is not argument between whether the Skins need a franchise QB or a better OL. If we're ever going to regularly compete for championships, then I think we can't settle for one or the other. We need both of those things.

The OL is not going to be reconstructed in one draft and it's certainly not going to happen with one 1st round draft pick. But a franchise QB can be obtained with a single draft pick (Peyton Manning) or a single trade (Sonny Jurgensen). Also, as our record improves our draft position will worsen which means that this draft may be our only chance to draft that franchise QB for a long time. That franchise QB could lead our team for as long as 15 years and we can devote every waking moment from the time he is drafted to finding ways to improve our OL.

You see, I think we can be in the top one-quarter of NFL teams, at best, with Jason Campbell or another journeyman at QB and a good OL. To me pretty good isn't nearly good enough. I want the Skins to build a championship-calibre team. Let's remember that the Super Bowls that Shanahan's team won featured John Elway at QB.

So, I think the first job that the Redskins talent-evaluators need to do is to determine if they believe that either Sam Bradford or Jimmy Clausen can be a franchise QB. If they think that neither can be a franchise QB, then they can pick Okung at #4 or trade down, if possible. If they think that both Bradford and Clausen can be franchise QB's, then they can stay put at #4 and take one of them. If they think that only one of them can become a franchise QB, then they need to try to trade up to get the #1 pick and take the QB they want to lead their championship-calbre team of the near future .

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

[quote=Dirtbag359;666890]What do you mean where did I get these stats. It's available on ESPN. I mean sure I rounded down some of the numbers but you'll find them here.

[url=http://espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=377845]Landry Jones Stats, News, Photos - Oklahoma Sooners - NCAA College Football - ESPN[/url]
[url=http://espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=188934]Sam Bradford Stats, News, Photos - Oklahoma Sooners - NCAA College Football - ESPN[/url]

I just want to put an end to this madness that somehow Landry Jones played on the same level as Bradford therefore Bradford is a system QB that benefited from being around top recruiting talent. The two aren't even in the same solar system.

Also just to clarify Oklahoma switched to a spread offense in 2008.[/quote]

Look the simple fact of the matter is the Redskins have never won a Super Bowl without a starting QB with a monosyllabic first name, and unless your QBs last name is Manning monosyllabic first names are the way to go. Joe, Steve, Phil, Trent, Ben, Tom, Kurt, Brad, Troy, Drew...

This is why we need to draft Sam Bradford and why Jevan Snead is changing his name to J. Evan Snead

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

[quote=Dirtbag359;666890]What do you mean where did I get these stats. It's available on ESPN. I mean sure I rounded down some of the numbers but you'll find them here.

[url=http://espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=377845]Landry Jones Stats, News, Photos - Oklahoma Sooners - NCAA College Football - ESPN[/url]
[url=http://espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=188934]Sam Bradford Stats, News, Photos - Oklahoma Sooners - NCAA College Football - ESPN[/url]

I just want to put an end to this madness that somehow Landry Jones played on the same level as Bradford therefore Bradford is a system QB that benefited from being around top recruiting talent. The two aren't even in the same solar system.

Also just to clarify Oklahoma switched to a spread offense in 2008.[/quote]

No you clearly made up the percentage that the guys were in shotgun or the spread cause that wasn't anywhere on ESPN.com

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

[quote=pocket$ $traight;666896]it seems to me that the redskins are in a catch 22. Or should we call it catch 4-12. Their quarterback didn't play well enough for them to win more than 4 games but their offensive line was so horrible that the quarterback wasn't able to play any better.

So i look at it this way...

I haven't seen one person that has said washington had a good line. I would like to see someone argue that they had an average line. Good offenses have good offensive lines. Even the people who played on the line said they were bad (mike williams interview).

Washington has a proven formula that great lines can turn average quarterbacks into super bowl mvps, so as much as everyone says we need a "franchise quarterback" i disagree. Conversely, a bad line can turn a franchise qb into a bum.

Pass on bradford and commit to our proven formula.[/quote]

+1 qft

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

[quote=Dirtbag359;666890]What do you mean where did I get these stats. It's available on ESPN. I mean sure I rounded down some of the numbers but you'll find them here.

[URL="http://espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=377845"]Landry Jones Stats, News, Photos - Oklahoma Sooners - NCAA College Football - ESPN[/URL]
[URL="http://espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=188934"]Sam Bradford Stats, News, Photos - Oklahoma Sooners - NCAA College Football - ESPN[/URL]

I just want to put an end to this madness that somehow Landry Jones played on the same level as Bradford therefore Bradford is a system QB that benefited from being around top recruiting talent. The two aren't even in the same solar system.

Also just to clarify Oklahoma switched to a spread offense in 2008.[/quote]


LOL Who on this board actually thought Jones was better than Bradford? I watch Oklahoma play every Saturday and trust me Jones isn't even close to Bradford.. I'm glad you beat me to the stats, finally someone with good sense of College FT Ball knowledge. . It's like when GUS said Ou never plays any good teams from out of conference.. If he would actually know what he was talking about he would see that OU play's one of the hardest Non-Conference schedules in the country. :doh:

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

[quote=CultBrennan59;666954]No you clearly made up the percentage that the guys were in shotgun or the spread cause that wasn't anywhere on ESPN.com[/quote]

What? That was their completion percentage. Heres the rundown. Oklahoma started running a spread offense in 2008. In 2007 they were running a pro style offense. The percentages you see with Landry Jones at 58% is his completion percentage. The 2008 and 2009 numbers indicate production in a spread, the 2007 numbers for Bradford indicate production in a pro style offense.

I was pointing out the strawman argument that Landry Jones played just as well as Sam Bradford when the numbers clearly indicate otherwise. Maybe it's not just you but I seem to keep hearing stuff like "oh Landry Jones put up the same numbers as Bradford" or something to that effect when that is clearly not the case. I mean maybe you can make a case that numbers don't mean everything but in this case they clearly do.

[quote=skinsfaninok;666962]LOL Who on this board actually thought Jones was better than Bradford? I watch Oklahoma play every Saturday and trust me Jones isn't even close to Bradford.. I'm glad you beat me to the stats, finally someone with good sense of College FT Ball knowledge. . It's like when GUS said Ou never plays any good teams from out of conference.. If he would actually know what he was talking about he would see that OU play's one of the hardest Non-Conference schedules in the country. :doh:[/quote]

What I want to know is how can all these Big XII school recruit all this amazing talent (Okung, Kindle, Robinson, Bryant, McCoy of both Colt and Gerald, Suh) and yet apparently they get downplayed "because their defenzes aren't as tuff as dem SEC defenses right der." I mean which is it? Do these teams just recruit on the offensive side of the ball and then visit the trauma unit at your local hospital to find their defensive players?

The two best defensive tackles in the country are Big XII DT's.

You know what, in the SEC it's easy to be a great defense when most of your opponents run the most vanilla offenses in the country and you practically refuse to play quality out of conference opponents. Thats why Florida has kicked so much ass since Meyer came, a lot of the SEC teams outside Alabama can't handle a well designed offense.

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

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;666896]

Washington has a proven formula that great lines can turn average quarterbacks into Super Bowl MVPs, so as much as everyone says we need a "franchise quarterback" I disagree. Conversely, a bad line can turn a franchise QB into a bum.

Pass on Bradford and commit to our proven formula.[/quote]
I kind of hate hearing this, not that I don't think that we should focus heavily on the line, but the past is the past. We've had great lines and not come close to approaching the Super Bowl, much less getting into it or winning it. Samuels-Jansen didn't get us there and we had a very good line at the time. We didn't have any good answer at QB though.

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

[quote=tryfuhl;666975]I kind of hate hearing this, not that I don't think that we should focus heavily on the line, but the past is the past. We've had great lines and not come close to approaching the Super Bowl, much less getting into it or winning it. Samuels-Jansen didn't get us there and we had a very good line at the time. We didn't have any good answer at QB though.[/quote]

It's a different league now. The Vikings have easily had a top 3 line over the past few years but with Tavaris Jackson at QB they barely inched into the playoffs. Heck the reason we were able to get into the playoffs in 2007 was in playing the Vikings all we had to do was stack the box. Bret Farve comes in and suddenly the Vikes are a Super Bowl contender, not to mention the fact that Sidney Rice goes from bust to pro bowler.

Also I'd like to point out that in 2007 we had a legitimate shot at making it to the Super Bowl thanks to Collins playing like a man possessed.

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

[quote=Dirtbag359;666966]What? That was their completion percentage. Heres the rundown. Oklahoma started running a spread offense in 2008. In 2007 they were running a pro style offense. The percentages you see with Landry Jones at 58% is his completion percentage. The 2008 and 2009 numbers indicate production in a spread, the 2007 numbers for Bradford indicate production in a pro style offense.

I was pointing out the strawman argument that Landry Jones played just as well as Sam Bradford when the numbers clearly indicate otherwise. Maybe it's not just you but I seem to keep hearing stuff like "oh Landry Jones put up the same numbers as Bradford" or something to that effect when that is clearly not the case. I mean maybe you can make a case that numbers don't mean everything but in this case they clearly do.



What I want to know is how can all these Big XII school recruit all this amazing talent (Okung, Kindle, Robinson, Bryant, McCoy of both Colt and Gerald, Suh) and yet apparently they get downplayed "because their defenzes aren't as tuff as dem SEC defenses right der." I mean which is it? Do these teams just recruit on the offensive side of the ball and then visit the trauma unit at your local hospital to find their defensive players?

The two best defensive tackles in the country are Big XII DT's.

You know what, in the SEC it's easy to be a great defense when most of your opponents run the most vanilla offenses in the country and you practically refuse to play quality out of conference opponents. Thats why Florida has kicked so much ass since Meyer came, a lot of the SEC teams outside Alabama can't handle a well designed offense.[/quote]


Don't forget about our man ORAKPO! LOL The Big 12 does have good D but hell when you have Bradford, McCoy, Zac Robinson, Dez Bryant, Jermaine Grasham, Crabtree... the list goes on. Its hard to stop all that talent. I love the SEC also, but I do agree that the offense in the SEC is down, other than Ole Miss and Fla, you really don't see alot of scoring. That being said they have won 4 straight Natl titles because their teams Defenses are so damn good. BTW I know this is completely off topic but John Wall is one the funnest BBall players I've ever watched at any level.

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

Mattyk, do I have permission to do a Okung or Bradford thread or does that qualify for "Threads you're tired of seeing?"

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

Yet another thread to debate it in? When ultimately it will turn into a Campbell vs Rookie thread?

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

Yeah, I think Okung vs Bradford vs Clausen vs Jason Campbell is already being discussed in several threads.

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

[quote=tryfuhl;666975]I kind of hate hearing this, not that I don't think that we should focus heavily on the line, but the past is the past. We've had great lines and not come close to approaching the Super Bowl, much less getting into it or winning it. Samuels-Jansen didn't get us there and we had a very good line at the time. We didn't have any good answer at QB though.[/quote]

Agreed. After all this "proven formula" hasn't won the Super Bowl for us in nearly 20 years.

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

[quote=SmootSmack;667065]Agreed. After all this "proven formula" hasn't won the Super Bowl for us in nearly 20 years.[/quote]


Well we haven't followed the formula for 20 years.

To compare the championship lines to the Samuels/Jansen/Thomas lines is very simpleminded.

Grimm - 1st team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 3 x all pro
Jacoby - 2nd team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 2 x all pro
Lachey - 2 pro bowls 2 all pros
Bostic - pro bowler
May - pro bowler
Schlereth - pro bowler

Samuels - never all pro
Thomas - never a pro bowler
Jansen - never a pro bowler (pretty overated in my book in general)

[B]The Samuels/Jansen lines NEVER had multiple pro bowlers and NEVER had a single all pro.[/B]

Comparing the two is baseless at best.

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

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;667176]Well we haven't followed the formula for 20 years.

To compare the championship lines to the Samuels/Jansen/Thomas lines is very simpleminded.

Grimm - 1st team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 3 x all pro
Jacoby - 2nd team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 2 x all pro
Lachey - 2 pro bowls 2 all pros
Bostic - pro bowler
May - pro bowler
Schlereth - pro bowler

Samuels - never all pro
Thomas - never a pro bowler
Jansen - never a pro bowler (pretty overated in my book in general)

[B]The Samuels/Jansen lines NEVER had multiple pro bowlers and NEVER had a single all pro.[/B]

Comparing the two is baseless at best.[/quote]

Samuels was never all pro really? Well anyway, if anything our "proven formula" has proven that we don't need to stack the line with first round picks to have a successful offensive line and team

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

[quote=SmootSmack;667178]Samuels was never all pro really? Well anyway, if anything our "proven formula" has proven that we don't need to stack the line with first round picks to have a successful offensive line and team[/quote]

He wasn't. It will take you 5 seconds to google that and verify it.

Philadelphia (for example, I am sure there are others) has been consistently committing early picks to their line. How have we measured up with them?

We have had two first round QB draft picks over the last decade. Where did that get us? 4-12.

Edit: Samuels was second team all pro in 2001. Washington and their second team all pro were 8-8.

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

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;667181]He wasn't. It will take you 5 seconds to google that and verify it.

Philadelphia (for example, I am sure there are others) has been consistently committing early picks to their line. How have we measured up with them?

We have had two first round QB draft picks over the last decade. Where did that get us? 4-12.

Edit: Samuels was second team all pro in 2001. Washington and their second team all pro were 8-8.[/quote]

Draft positions of the Hogs:
Grimm 3rd
Lachey 1st
Bostic undrafted
Mark May 1st
Jacoby undrafted
Schlereth 10th

Most of the Hogs were not 1st rounders. 2 of the Hogs were not even drafted.

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

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;667181]He wasn't. It will take you 5 seconds to google that and verify it.

Philadelphia (for example, I am sure there are others) has been consistently committing early picks to their line. How have we measured up with them?

We have had two first round QB draft picks over the last decade. Where did that get us? 4-12.[/quote]

I don't doubt you, just never crossed my mind that he wasn't. But I guess playing in the same era as Ogden, Roaf, and Walter Jones would make it difficult

I believe the Eagles have drafted one offensive linemen in the first round since 1999. And I think maybe only or two in the 2nd round.

I'm all for using the 2nd-4th rounds to stock up on OL

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

[quote=SmootSmack;667184]I don't doubt you, just never crossed my mind that he wasn't. But I guess playing in the same era as Ogden, Roaf, and Walter Jones would make it difficult

I believe the Eagles have drafted one offensive linemen in the first round since 1999. And I think maybe only or two in the 2nd round.

I'm all for using the 2nd-4th rounds to stock up on OL[/quote]

Well he was second team in 2001. According to Profootballreference.com he is a 6 time pro-bowler. So I guess you could argue it either way.

I definitely think you can get guys later and turn them into gems but we have to commit to it.

It seems that in recent drafts there has been a pretty good success rate with 1st round o-lineman.

I worry about taking the QB because of the examples of teams being stuck in mediocrity for years if they get the pick wrong. I think there are enough questions about both Clausen and Bradford to let them slip past 4.

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

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;667191]Well he was second team in 2001. According to Profootballreference.com he is a 6 time pro-bowler. So I guess you could argue it either way.

I definitely think you can get guys later and turn them into gems but we have to commit to it.

It seems that in recent drafts there has been a pretty good success rate with 1st round o-lineman.

[B]I worry about taking the QB because of the examples of teams being stuck in mediocrity for years if they get the pick wrong.[/B] I think there are enough questions about both Clausen and Bradford to let them slip past 4.[/quote]

I understand your concern. If you whiff on a first-round QB, you are screwed.

However, the opposite is also true: there are several examples of teams "stuck" in competitiveness for years because they got the choice right.

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

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;667176]Well we haven't followed the formula for 20 years.

To compare the championship lines to the Samuels/Jansen/Thomas lines is very simpleminded.

Grimm - 1st team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 3 x all pro
Jacoby - 2nd team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 2 x all pro
Lachey - 2 pro bowls 2 all pros
Bostic - pro bowler
May - pro bowler
Schlereth - pro bowler

Samuels - never all pro
Thomas - never a pro bowler
Jansen - never a pro bowler (pretty overated in my book in general)

[B]The Samuels/Jansen lines NEVER had multiple pro bowlers and NEVER had a single all pro.[/B]

Comparing the two is baseless at best.[/quote]

That doesn't surprise me at all. Offensive lines are generally decorated when the team wins. Jansen was very good but that team was never getting 2 pro bowl OL with thier record so when the time came for a pro bowl honor Samuels would always get the honor.

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

[quote=Lotus;667192]I understand your concern. If you whiff on a first-round QB, you are screwed.

However, the opposite is also true: there are several examples of teams "stuck" in competitiveness for years because they got the choice right.[/quote]


I will say this. I don't see Clausen or Bradford as the next Akili Smith or Tim Couch. I think that both of their bodies of work have shown that they can play at the next level but hell, we could all be wrong. Some guy taken in the 7th round could be the next Brady.

I will freely admit that I could change my mind between now and the draft. If we sign Levi and or a couple of starting quality tackles in FA (hell maybe Samuels decides to come back too...I know...big if) then the first couple of rounds will look different to me.

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

[quote=Lotus;667183]Draft positions of the Hogs:
Grimm 3rd
Lachey 1st
Bostic undrafted
Mark May 1st
Jacoby undrafted
Schlereth 10th

Most of the Hogs were not 1st rounders. 2 of the Hogs were not even drafted.[/quote]

It's amazing what a couple of outstanding players like Jim Lachey and Mark May can do for an offensive line isn't it? ;) They don't all have to be first rounders. Trading QB Schroeder for LT Lachey was one of the best trades the Redskins ever pulled off.

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

[quote=53Fan;667222]It's amazing what a couple of outstanding players like Jim Lachey and Mark May can do for an offensive line isn't it? ;) They don't all have to be first rounders. [B]Trading QB Schroeder for LT Lachey was one of the best trades the Redskins ever pulled off.[/B][/quote]

Yes! I still can't believe that Oakland bit on that one.

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

[quote=53Fan;667222]It's amazing what a couple of outstanding players like Jim Lachey and Mark May can do for an offensive line isn't it? ;) They don't all have to be first rounders. Trading QB Schroeder for LT Lachey was one of the best trades the Redskins ever pulled off.[/quote]

You know what's funny? We also got a conditional draft pick (maybe more) in that deal

You know what's even funnier? Three years before that trade the Raiders passed on a chance to sign Doug Williams opening the door for the Redskins to sign him

You know what's sad? The guy in Oakland who insisted on pulling the trigger on that deal...Mike Shanahan

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

Chris Samuels, Derrick Dockery, Casey Rabach, Randy Thomas, and Jon Jansen was easily one of the best lines we had. Obviously they don't compare to the hogs but nevertheless in 2005-2007 (Jansen missed most of 2007 but they were still very good) they were awesome. They had one last hurrah in the first half of 2008 and boy did they dominate. Maybe we could win a Super Bowl with JC playing behind a line like that who knows.

Anyway todays wish: Okung-McCoy. It will probably change tomorrow.

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

This is what i would like, we need to find out what Seattle is looking at & see if they will trade up with us for their 2 1st rd picks.

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

[quote=Dirtbag359;667246]Chris Samuels, Derrick Dockery, Casey Rabach, Randy Thomas, and Jon Jansen was easily one of the best lines we had. Obviously they don't compare to the hogs but nevertheless in 2005-2007 (Jansen missed most of 2007 but they were still very good) they were awesome. They had one last hurrah in the first half of 2008 and boy did they dominate. Maybe we could win a Super Bowl with JC playing behind a line like that who knows.

[B]Anyway todays wish: Okung-McCoy. It will probably change tomorrow.[/B][/quote]

For me, McCoy does not impress as an upgrade. So my wish today, barring Bradford, is either:
1st OT Okung
2nd RB Jahvid Best
4th OT Kyle Calloway
5th LB Darryl Sharpton
7th C John Estes

or

1st OT Okung
2nd OT Charles Brown or Vlad Ducasse
4th RB Montario Hardesty
5th LB Darryl Sharpton
7th C John Estes

As with you, every day for me is a new opportunity for a changed opinion. :)

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

[quote=Dirtbag359;667246]Chris Samuels, Derrick Dockery, Casey Rabach, Randy Thomas, and Jon Jansen was easily one of the best lines we had. Obviously they don't compare to the hogs but nevertheless in 2005-2007 (Jansen missed most of 2007 but they were still very good) they were awesome. They had one last hurrah in the first half of 2008 and boy did they dominate. Maybe we could win a Super Bowl with JC playing behind a line like that who knows.

Anyway todays wish: Okung-McCoy. It will probably change tomorrow.[/quote]

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

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

[quote=NYCskinfan82;667254]This is what i would like, we need to find out what Seattle is looking out & see if they will trade up with us for their 2 1st rd picks.[/quote]

If we can't get Bradford, and Seattle is jonesing for Clausen (Carroll recruited him heavily before), that is a realistic and good trade-down opportunity.

Edit: actually the trade value chart shows that we'd have to throw something significant in to make that happen.

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

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

Great.....I guess I wouldn't mind Buluga but his medical history worries me. On top of that I know it's Retro-chic to say you want to trade down but in the case of Bradford and Okung off the board I think that would be the best option. Hopefully at that point someone would really want Berry, McCoy (DT), or Clausen, assuming of course we end up not liking Clausen.

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

[quote=Lotus;667255]For me, McCoy does not impress as an upgrade. So my wish today, barring Bradford, is either:
1st OT Okung
2nd RB Jahvid Best
4th OT Kyle Calloway
5th LB Darryl Sharpton
7th C John Estes

or

[B]1st OT Okung
2nd OT Charles Brown or Vlad Ducasse
4th RB Montario Hardesty
5th LB Darryl Sharpton
7th C John Estes[/B]

As with you, every day for me is a new opportunity for a changed opinion. :)[/quote]

I like this scenario better, should we not be able to get Bradford. what LB position does sharpton play btw?

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

[quote=SmootSmack;667238]You know what's funny? We also got a conditional draft pick (maybe more) in that deal

You know what's even funnier? Three years before that trade the Raiders passed on a chance to sign Doug Williams opening the door for the Redskins to sign him

[B]You know what's sad? The guy in Oakland who insisted on pulling the trigger on that deal...Mike Shanahan[/B][/quote]

Oh boy. :doh:....thanks Mike?

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

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

How funny would that be for the 2 names being bandied about for 3 months (Bradford and Okung) to be gone by the time we pick and a collective 'who?' is tossed out there by many that are hung up on those names..

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

[quote=CultBrennan59;667289]I like this scenario better, should we not be able to get Bradford. [B]what LB position does sharpton play btw?[/B][/quote]

In my amateur projection, he is a 3-4 inside linebacker.

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

[quote=Dirtbag359;667246]Chris Samuels, Derrick Dockery, Casey Rabach, Randy Thomas, and Jon Jansen was easily one of the best lines we had. Obviously they don't compare to the hogs but nevertheless in 2005-2007 (Jansen missed most of 2007 but they were still very good) they were awesome. They had one last hurrah in the first half of 2008 and boy did they dominate. Maybe we could win a Super Bowl with JC playing behind a line like that who knows.

Anyway todays wish: Okung-McCoy. It will probably change tomorrow.[/quote]


You say that but they never even won the division. I love the individual pieces but don't you need results to be compared to any of the lines that dominated for a decade?