Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;663313]Couldn't have said it better.

The thing with Bradford why everyone likes him is because he has the two traits which just about every football coach in america looks at;
Is he accurate?
and is he a winner?

Definitley, and yes.


and thank you Dirtbag for your evaluations of the two best QB's in this years draft.[/quote]

No problem. Though I must say I disagree on the second trait. I'd say the ability to read defenses is the second most important trait for a QB to have. Football is the ultimate team game so assigning a win to one player is a little to much for me.

@Ruhskins: If you're reading this you can see what I was talking about with ESPN Insider under Clausens Mental Markup. I sware it's really starting to get to me.


Lol, the Bill fans have an idea of what we're going through.....ok it's kind of different because at least we have a good QB, Buffalo has nothing.
[quote]Edwards has coinflip chance?
9:15
AM ET
Trent Edwards | Bills Top Email

While he didn't appear to be the answer at QB in 2009, Trent Edwards has "at least a 50 percent chance" of being the starter at the outset of the 2010 season, according to Mark Gaughan of the Buffalo News. [B]That sound you hear is Bills Nation collectively hurling their laptops at the wall.[/B]

Gaughan notes that by improving in the trenches -- likely going with a blue-chip OT at No. 9 overall in the draft -- the team can "achieve respectability." If they go OT (or another non-QB position) at No. 9, the QB they take in a later round will likely be unready to start right out of the gates.[/quote]

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Right now, I don't even think we will be able to get Bradford. This is the first sign right here [url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/16/report-bulger-cleans-out-his-locker/]Report: Bulger cleans out locker | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

So now they'll need a QB.

And the team which picks in front of us, the Bucs may trade out of their 3rd overall pick

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/16/dominik-says-bucs-are-ready-to-trade-up-or-to-trade-down/]Dominik says Bucs are ready to trade up, or to trade down | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

now if they were to trade down with the Bills or any other team in need of a QB, then its 50-50 as to which QB they take and the upper hand goes to Bradford.

So now maybe we may not even get Bradford even if we want to...

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;663494]Right now, I don't even think we will be able to get Bradford. This is the first sign right here [url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/16/report-bulger-cleans-out-his-locker/]Report: Bulger cleans out locker | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

So now they'll need a QB.

And the team which picks in front of us, the Bucs may trade out of their 3rd overall pick

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/16/dominik-says-bucs-are-ready-to-trade-up-or-to-trade-down/]Dominik says Bucs are ready to trade up, or to trade down | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

now if they were to trade down with the Bills or any other team in need of a QB, then its 50-50 as to which QB they take and the upper hand goes to Bradford.

So now maybe we may not even get Bradford even if we want to...[/quote]

Apparently they're quite smitten with Vick right now.

[quote]Rams' interest in Vick intensifies?
9:18
AM ET
Michael Vick | Eagles | Interested: Cardinals?, Bills?, Panthers?, Rams?, Raiders? Top Email

Possible Vick landing spots
Buffalo Bills: The team desperately needs a QB, and there could be a scheme match as well: Bills coach Chan Gailey made a viable NFL starter out of Tyler Thigpen in 2008 running a spread offense, and Vick is a souped-up version of Thigpen.
St. Louis Rams: GM Billy Devaney has a relationship with Vick dating back to the Atlanta Falcons days, and Devaney even visited Vick in prison. Like the Bills, the Rams are in dire straits with their QB situation.
We've been speculating on some possible trade locations for Michael Vick for a while now. Bernie Miklasz of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that Rams assistants were calling in to Philly to ask about Vick and during his lap around Radio Row at the Super Bowl last week, Rams coach Steve Spagnuolo seemed genuinely interested in acquiring Vick, per Miklasz. With the word that Marc Bulger might not be long for St. Louis, this has increased speculation that the Rams are heavily in play for No. 7.

Vick had some interesting remarks on the radio recently (as reported by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution). He indicated that he was "complacent, somewhat lazy" while with the Falcons, and he vowed to work harder for his next team. Buzz on a possible Vick deal puts the price tag as a fourth-rounder, according to multiple sources.

In addition to the Bills and Rams -- considered the two front-runners -- Clifton Brown of the Sporting News opines that the Raiders, Panthers and Cardinals all make sense as trade destinations for No. 7.[/quote]

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;663494]Right now, I don't even think we will be able to get Bradford. This is the first sign right here [url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/16/report-bulger-cleans-out-his-locker/]Report: Bulger cleans out locker | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

So now they'll need a QB.

And the team which picks in front of us, the Bucs may trade out of their 3rd overall pick

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/16/dominik-says-bucs-are-ready-to-trade-up-or-to-trade-down/]Dominik says Bucs are ready to trade up, or to trade down | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

now if they were to trade down with the Bills or any other team in need of a QB, then its 50-50 as to which QB they take and the upper hand goes to Bradford.

So now maybe we may not even get Bradford even if we want to...[/quote]

You trust PFT wayy too much. That being said, sounds like under these scenarios we would get our pick of the litter when it comes to tackles. Not a horrible situation to be in if you are a Redskins fan.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/kipers-argument-for-the-redski.html#more]Redskins Insider - Kiper's argument for the Redskins drafting Clausen[/url]

Mel Kipers reasoning to Jason Reid as to why we should get Clausen and go QB first OL second.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Here's some news about Bradford for all of you that have a boner for him...

[url=http://www.movethesticks.com/?p=1309]Move the Sticks » Breaking News[/url]

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;663269]Read this and tell me thats not spot on. To me it's scary how accurate this is. From the positives with accuracy on short to intermediate routes to the problems with deep ball accuracy.[/quote]As a four year college starter, you wouldn't expect them to miss much. That's pretty much the principle that all rookie QB projection systems are built on.

He's a lot quicker in his reads than he was under Saunders. The offense Saunders had him running though was not Jason Campbell. His rate statistics make him look like a completely different player in that offense.

The Zorn-era Campbell is pretty much consistent with his college projection. Of course, Auburn could handle a three man rush, and Ronnie Brown/Carnell Williams weren't exactly no-production prima donas. If nothing else, Zorn certainly didn't scale anything back for him (which I certainly wouldn't say about ThomasKelly).

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=GTripp0012;664627]The Zorn-era Campbell is pretty much consistent with his college projection.[/quote]

You know what i found impressive about JC's senior year?

He had a 10 yard per [I]attempt[/I] not per completion per [I]attempt[/I] i'm not a historian but that's pretty sick and he maintained 69% completion.
I know the scouting report said deep ball issues but he must have been money on the deep intermediate routes because you're doing something right when you have 10 YPA and 69% comp.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Stay The Course: Thursday And Long-Redskins Shouldn't Be Drafting A QB

[url=http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/02/18/thursday-and-long-redskins-shouldn't-be-drafting-a-qb/]NFL Team News, Scores, Standings, Schedules, Stats & Transactions[/url]

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=53Fan;664633]Stay The Course: Thursday And Long-Redskins Shouldn't Be Drafting A QB

[url=http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/02/18/thursday-and-long-redskins-shouldn't-be-drafting-a-qb/]NFL Team News, Scores, Standings, Schedules, Stats & Transactions[/url][/quote]

Good article...nothing new but still pretty convincing. Honestly my best case scenario, the thing I'd like to see, is JC have a Pro-Bowl season in the B & G this year behind a totally revamped line.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=The Goat;664694]Good article...nothing new but still pretty convincing. Honestly my best case scenario, the thing I'd like to see, is JC have a [B]Pro-Bowl season [/B]in the B & G this year behind a totally revamped line.[/quote]

Won't happen, if he were behind the Jets OL :smashfrea

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;664746]Won't happen, if he were behind the Jets OL :smashfrea[/quote]

The Jets offensive line could make YOU look like a good QB if you play behind them.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Ruhskins;664749]The Jets offensive line could make YOU look like a good QB if you play behind them.[/quote]

No, and they couldn't make Campbell either...by the way Russell Okung from Oklahoma State has been getting strong comparisons to D'Brickashaw Ferguson, would that be a good enough OLineman for a Zone blocking shanahan offense?

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;664753][B]No, and they couldn't make Campbell either[/B]...by the way Russell Okung from Oklahoma State has been getting strong comparisons to D'Brickashaw Ferguson, would that be a good enough OLineman for a Zone blocking shanahan offense?[/quote]

Really? How are you so sure? Okung is the best tackle out there, and even we don't draft Okung, Davis could be another option. You do know that Left Tackle is right up there with QB as one the most important positions for a team, and one that is worth drafting in the top 5?

Are you so obsessed with Bradford that you would pass on the best tackle of the draft? In case you haven't noticed, the last time the Redskins drafted a first round tackle, I think it worked out fine.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=CultBrennan59;664753]No, and they couldn't make Campbell either...by the way Russell Okung from Oklahoma State has been getting strong comparisons to D'Brickashaw Ferguson, would that be a good enough OLineman for a Zone blocking shanahan offense?[/quote]

Sanchez threw 20 INTs behind the best line in the NFL and with only having to throw 10-15 times a game.

Campbell threw half that many behind the worst line in the league and being relied on completely because we were always losing and couldn't run the ball.

Switch places and Campbell would have been a Pro Bowler easily and Sanchez would be a vegetable after Week 8's 35th INT.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Buster;664846]Sanchez threw 20 INTs behind the best line in the NFL and with only having to throw 10-15 times a game.

Campbell threw half that many behind the worst line in the league and being relied on completely because we were always losing and couldn't run the ball.

Switch places and Campbell would have been a Pro Bowler easily and Sanchez would be a vegetable after Week 8's 35th INT.[/quote]

The Bradford camp doesn't believe in offensive lines. They just get in the way of QBs. :doh:

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Ruhskins;664849]The Bradford camp doesn't believe in offensive lines. They just get in the way of QBs. :doh:[/quote]

You're right. You're 100% right. I'm really hoping we don't make any trades, don't sign any free agents, simply skip out on making any other selections during the draft and that we just pick Bradford at #4 and go home. It would totally piss me off if we sign Ben Hamilton as a FA, draft an LT like Brown, Campbell, or Fox at the top of the 2nd round, trade into the 3rd and pick up an RT like Calloway, spend a 4th on an interior lineman...that would really grind my gears. Because all I want is Sam Bradford and nothing else. After all, the off-season is all about the 1st round pick and nothing else, isn't it?

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=SmootSmack;664860]You're right. You're 100% right. I'm really hoping we don't make any trades, don't sign any free agents, simply skip out on making any other selections during the draft and that we just pick Bradford at #4 and go home. It would totally piss me off if we sign Ben Hamilton as a FA, draft an LT like Brown, Campbell, or Fox at the top of the 2nd round, trade into the 3rd and pick up an RT like Calloway, spend a 4th on an interior lineman...that would really grind my gears. Because all I want is Sam Bradford and nothing else. After all, the off-season is all about the 1st round pick and nothing else, isn't it?[/quote]

Yeah, but they could also pick up Okung with the #4, and a solid RT with #2 or in the later rounds, and you have your tackles for the next 10 years (if everything works out).

While I get what you are doing, you're one of the few people in the Bradford camp that actually makes an argument on how to build the line and drafting Bradford, without saying "Shanahan is know to build offensive lines with just about anyone."

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Ruhskins;664864]Yeah, but they could also pick up Okung with the #4, and a solid RT with #2 or in the later rounds, and you have your tackles for the next 10 years (if everything works out).

While I get what you are doing, you're one of the few people in the Bradford camp that actually makes an argument on how to build the line and drafting Bradford, [B]without saying "Shanahan is know to build offensive lines with just about anyone."[/B][/quote]

I agree with you about that reasoning. We keep hearing that Shanahan can turn any lineman (or back) into a solid performer. If that were true, Denver would have been #1 in offense every single year. I'm willing to give Shanahan somewhat of a pass in respect to his expertise but the "he can turn anyone..." arguments are dangerous and mistaken.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Ruhskins;664864]Yeah, but they could also pick up Okung with the #4, and a solid RT with #2 or in the later rounds, and you have your tackles for the next 10 years (if everything works out). [/quote]When do we get the elite QB to get us to a SB contention level? If we get the OL this draft and our D performs in the top half of the league, we're a .500 team. It's extremely unlikey an elite QB hits FA. If we're at .500 we're picking in the 14-18 range, no elite QB prospects there for 2011. So do we continue to have average QB play and try to build a dominant D and run game (Ravens/Jets/2000 Ravens/2002 Bucs)? How do we get past .500 to SB contention level without an elite QB?

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=SmootSmack;664860]You're right. You're 100% right. I'm really hoping we don't make any trades, don't sign any free agents, simply skip out on making any other selections during the draft and that we just pick Bradford at #4 and go home. It would totally piss me off if we sign Ben Hamilton as a FA, draft an LT like Brown, Campbell, or Fox at the top of the 2nd round, trade into the 3rd and pick up an RT like Calloway, spend a 4th on an interior lineman...that would really grind my gears. Because all I want is Sam Bradford and nothing else. After all, the off-season is all about the 1st round pick and nothing else, isn't it?[/quote]

Excellent point SS. People keep treating the #4 pick like it is the only opportunity that we have to upgrade the team, when in fact it is just one opportunity (if a good one) among many.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;664896]When do we get the elite QB to get us to a SB contention level? If we get the OL this draft and our D performs in the top half of the league, we're a .500 team. It's extremely unlikey an elite QB hits FA. If we're at .500 we're picking in the 14-18 range, no elite QB prospects there for 2011. So do we continue to have average QB play and try to build a dominant D and run game (Ravens/Jets/2000 Ravens/2002 Bucs)? How do we get past .500 to SB contention level without an elite QB?[/quote]

So you're banking on the fact that Bradford is the sure thing? Even if he's elite, but our offensive line sucks because all we got were old UFAs and low-round picks to build the worst offensive line from 2009, what's not to say that Bradford doesn't become the next David Carr? We're back to square one with the same QB and offensive line problems. If you want your elite QB so bad, in 2011, after building the offensive line with Okung or Davis, you can trade up from the mid-first round to get your elite QB. Hell,you can probably even play him right away the way Baltimore and the Jets have done with their rookie QBs.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Ruhskins;664905]So you're banking on the fact that Bradford is the sure thing? Even if he's elite, but our offensive line sucks because all we got were old UFAs and low-round picks to build the worst offensive line from 2009, what's not to say that Bradford doesn't become the next David Carr? We're back to square one with the same QB and offensive line problems. If you want your elite QB so bad, [B]in 2011, after building the offensive line with Okung or Davis, you can trade up from the mid-first round to get your elite QB.[/B] Hell,you can probably even play him right away the way Baltimore and the Jets have done with their rookie QBs.[/quote]

I first want to say that I am not partisan here and would be happy with either an OT or a QB at #4.

But I think it would be easier in 2011 to trade up to get a stud tackle than it would be to trade up to get an elite QB. Elite QB's typically go in the top 5 or maybe top 10 picks, whereas very good tackles can be found all over the first round.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

I give up.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Ruhskins;664905]So you're banking on the fact that Bradford is the sure thing? Even if he's elite, but our offensive line sucks because all we got were old UFAs and low-round picks to build the worst offensive line from 2009, what's not to say that Bradford doesn't become the next David Carr? We're back to square one with the same QB and offensive line problems. If you want your elite QB so bad, in 2011, after building the offensive line with Okung or Davis, you can trade up from the mid-first round to get your elite QB. Hell,you can probably even play him right away the way Baltimore and the Jets have done with their rookie QBs.[/quote]
I'm not banking on Bradford. I'm banking on Clausen. He's the only QB I would use the #4 pick on. That's just me, I have no idea how Shanahan/Allen have Bradford/Clausen rated.

Our OL isn't going to be in the shambles it was last year. I think we can agree Dock is fine. Rabach is serviceable but needs to be replaced soon. Between Levi Jones and Heyer we can produce a serviceable RT. At the top of the second we may find Brown from USC, Campbell from UMD, Asamoah, or Pouncey from UF. UFAs Bridges, Pashos can provide depth at T. I'm not ready to give up on Rinehart and/or E. Williams developing at G. Better scheme, better playcalling will also help the OL.

The David Carr thing doesn't work, we're not an expansion team and we have excellent offensive minds at HC & OC. Didn't Carr run a spread at Fresno St.?

Who are the elite QBs for 2011, Locker, maybe Luck. Now way I'm giving up what it would cost in picks/players to get into the top 5 to get one of those two, even if they are elite. We have the pick to get an elite QB now, we need to get it done if Clausen is there.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

I really think the biggest point of contention here is Campbell. Some believe with a quality o-line we can go to the playoffs and beyond and question whether either Bradford or Clausen would truly be an upgrade at QB. Others believe we'll never go far with JC whether we improve the line or not and a change must be made at the position. Unfortunately due to the circumstances with, poor o-line play, system changes, unstability etc., it's become hard to come up with a conclusive answer. There are reasons to believe JC can do the job, improving stats behind a horrible o-line etc., and there are reasons to believe one of the top QB's in the draft could be elite, but there are still unanswered questions in both cases.
One thing I'm sure of, we cannot win with this o-line. If we decide to draft Bradford or Clausen, I will be behind it. But if we draft Okung in the first and Pouncey in the second for example, I'll feel like the days of the o-line taking a backseat to any and every skill position are over. And I will be damn happy about it.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Ruhskins;664864]Yeah, but they could also pick up Okung with the #4, and a solid RT with #2 or in the later rounds, and you have your tackles for the next 10 years (if everything works out).

While I get what you are doing, you're one of the few people in the Bradford camp that actually makes an argument on how to build the line and drafting Bradford, without saying "Shanahan is know to build offensive lines with just about anyone."[/quote]
It seems that most people making the argument of a QB are saying the same thing as Smoot

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

Either way, assuming we have a QB picked early.. and starts somewhat early on, you can be sure every mistake will be pointed out and used to trash him, though Campbell was sheltered from most of those

reminds me a lot of the political threads where everything is the new admin's fault

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=tryfuhl;664933]Either way, assuming we have a QB picked early.. and starts somewhat early on, you can be sure every mistake will be pointed out and used to trash him, though Campbell was sheltered from most of those

[B]reminds me a lot of the political threads where everything is the new admin's fault[/B][/quote]

Most of it is

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

yeah, every thing was just peachy under Zorn and Pres. Bush. maybe some day we can have threads that stick to the topic

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;664896]When do we get the elite QB to get us to a SB contention level? If we get the OL this draft and our D performs in the top half of the league, we're a .500 team. It's extremely unlikey an elite QB hits FA. If we're at .500 we're picking in the 14-18 range, no elite QB prospects there for 2011. So do we continue to have average QB play and try to build a dominant D and run game (Ravens/Jets/2000 Ravens/2002 Bucs)? How do we get past .500 to SB contention level without an elite QB?[/quote]An elite offense player at ANY position, quarterback or anywhere else, probably gets us past .500.

And again, if there's an elite quarterback in this draft, someone with the ideal height, arm, accuracy, mental makeup, and college production, my methods certainly aren't good enough to find him. Bradford, I think, is the one guy who even passes the smell test, but even then, I wouldn't spend a top pick on a guy who I haven't seen deliver the ball under duress in college.

We should at least try to draft an elite offensive player at No. 4. Saying that we need a franchise qb (whatever the heck that is) shrinks the possible talent pool by 80-90 percent. We need way to much help to limit the search to one position. And I'd use the same argument for the OT...except that Davis and Okung come ahead of any RB or WR or QB on most boards. I think there's a general consensus that the three highest [I]rated[/I] players (as opposed to [I]best prospects[/I]) are some combination of Davis, Okung, and Bradford.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

What if Berry is there at 4? Which is very possible. Do you take him over OL or QB?

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=SmootSmack;665016]What if Berry is there at 4? Which is very possible. Do you take him over OL or QB?[/quote]

Well if he is it just increases are chances of trading down. I don't want us taking secondary help in the first round again when our offense is such an area of concern.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=WaldSkins;665023]Well if he is it just increases are chances of trading down. I don't want us taking secondary help in the first round again when our offense is such an area of concern.[/quote]

I'll second that. I'd love to have him, but our offensive needs are much greater.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=SmootSmack;665016]What if Berry is there at 4? Which is very possible. Do you take him over OL or QB?[/quote]No. Agree w/53 & Wald, perfect trade down scenario for us.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=GTripp0012;664969]We should at least try to draft an elite offensive player at No. 4. Saying that we need a franchise qb (whatever the heck that is) shrinks the possible talent pool by 80-90 percent. We need way to much help to limit the search to one position. And I'd use the same argument for the OT...except that Davis and Okung come ahead of any RB or WR or QB on most boards. [B]I think there's a general consensus that the three highest [I]rated[/I] players (as opposed to [I]best prospects[/I]) are some combination of Davis, Okung, and Bradford[/B].[/quote]Not so fast my friend....certainly not a consensus, me and Mel have "broken from the draft pack" :)

[URL="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/kipers-argument-for-the-redski.html"]Redskins Insider - Kiper's argument for the Redskins drafting Clausen[/URL]

From the article: "In the case of a player like Clausen or Bradford, I would take the quarterback first. [B]I have Clausen and Bradford rated higher than Davis and Okung. [/B]So I would go the quarterback first, then try to get the offensive tackle in the second round and hope that a Bruce Campbell or a Bulaga or somebody like that fell down to me."

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;664896]When do we get the elite QB to get us to a SB contention level? If we get the OL this draft and our D performs in the top half of the league, we're a .500 team. It's extremely unlikey an elite QB hits FA. If we're at .500 we're picking in the 14-18 range, no elite QB prospects there for 2011. So do we continue to have average QB play and try to build a dominant D and run game (Ravens/Jets/2000 Ravens/2002 Bucs)? How do we get past .500 to SB contention level without an elite QB?[/quote]

You don't is the answer. Look at the super bowl winners since the skins last won in 1991. All but like 2 of the super bowls were won by a team with an elite QB. That timeframe is also the start of the free agency era of the NFL. In the era of free agency all the teams have holes and no position covers up more holes then a great QB. If Shanahaan thinks one of these QB's is franchise material then they need to draft him no matter what else is available.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

I want us, to trade back to get more picks and go OL, OL, & OL you fill in the rest. In the NFL they hit awhole lot harder i like Bradford over Clausen (i'm a ND fan) but maybe that freak accident was a sign of things to come.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

So I was talking to my neighbor, whose an Oklahoma alum, played football there a few years as a walk on, watches every OU game on TV, has raised his kids to love OU, and is also a Skins fan. I said to him "Do you think the Skins should get Bradford?" He said "Not behind that OLine...until the redskins show me that they want to protect the QB, then no, he'd get killed because he's a rookie. He does have better awareness of pressure and when to release the ball, unlike Campbell, but I would draft an OLineman and keep Campbell back there and let him and his shoulder take the hits than Bradfords."

I then asked him "Do you think Bradford could be a good QB in the NFL or is he a system guy, because Landry Jones stepped in and played well for you all this past year."

He said "Well yeah OU plays the spread offense, but Bradford would make some throws that spread or not, makes him look like an NFL QB. Yeah I definitely think he'll be a good NFL QB, but he needs an OL to protect him which he doesn't have here... And Landry Jones was good because he was a highly rated QB coming out of high school and sat a year on the bench to study the offense and watch Bradford, as well as the fact that OU's offense is for the most part QB friendly, but also great players around them." He also said he would have liked to see Bradford this year with a worse OL like what OU had this year, so he could see how he would respond more to pressure." He also said that he wouldn't want Clausen, we need OLineman.


That said, and the fact that I trust him, I'd say, get Okung or the next best starting LT.

Re: Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;665031]Not so fast my friend....certainly not a consensus, me and Mel have "broken from the draft pack" :)

[URL="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/kipers-argument-for-the-redski.html"]Redskins Insider - Kiper's argument for the Redskins drafting Clausen[/URL]

From the article: "In the case of a player like Clausen or Bradford, I would take the quarterback first. [B]I have Clausen and Bradford rated higher than Davis and Okung. [/B]So I would go the quarterback first, then try to get the offensive tackle in the second round and hope that a Bruce Campbell or a Bulaga or somebody like that fell down to me."[/quote]

I posted this earlier on David Garrard and personally it sounds way to close to home:
[quote]2009 Season Outlook
It's unfair to judge Garrard too harshly for his 2008 numbers. The interior of the Jacksonville offensive line, previously a strength, was pummeled by injury early in the season, leading Garrard to the ignominious crown of most knocked-down quarterback of the year. Despite the heat, Garrard managed a decent completion percentage (61.1) and finished 10th in the NFL in passing yards. The Jags have concerns at tackle for '09 but did use their first two picks on Eugene Monroe and Eben Britton, and they should rely heavily on those rookies. But unless Torry Holt finds the Fountain of Youth or another receiver steps up, Garrard won't be a fantasy starter. However, he's a heady decision-maker and could lead the league in rush yards by a quarterback. He's a bye-week quarterback with a high ceiling.[/quote]

I'm personally glad I'm not Bruce Allen because this is a tough decision. Do you go with Campbell and hope to recapture the first half of 2008 magic that you had going and if you do can you win the Super Bowl? Or worst yet do you fix the O-Line and find that Jason is still just an above average QB leaving you stuck at 8-8 or 9-7 and out of range to draft the top rookie QB's? Theres so much to consider here it's not even funny.