Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by paintrain

this again relies on the flawed logic that if we draft bradford then our opening day starting ol will be levi jones, derrick dockery, casey rabach, edwin williams and stephon heyer. Are there actually fans who believe that if we draft bradford at #4 then we are not going address the ol at any other point in the offseason? If i hear 'not behind that same ol' or 'if they don't address the ol' once more i am going to choke someone.

amen!

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

This again relies on the flawed logic that if we draft Bradford then our opening day starting OL will be Levi Jones, Derrick Dockery, Casey Rabach, Edwin Williams and Stephon Heyer. Are there actually fans who believe that if we draft Bradford at #4 then we are NOT going address the OL at any other point in the offseason? If I hear 'not behind that same OL' or 'if they don't address the OL' once more I am going to choke someone.

I think he's talking about a proven OL, not a bad one or a whole new one which we would have no idea what it would be like.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

I think he's talking about a proven OL, not a bad one or a whole new one which we would have no idea what it would be like.

Define a 'proven OL'.. We're not going to be able to completely remake the OL but with a couple of additions/subtractions we should be able to improve over what we trotted out there (8 starting RG and Stephon Heyer) for most of '09.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

This again relies on the flawed logic that if we draft Bradford then our opening day starting OL will be Levi Jones, Derrick Dockery, Casey Rabach, Edwin Williams and Stephon Heyer. Are there actually fans who believe that if we draft Bradford at #4 then we are NOT going address the OL at any other point in the offseason? If I hear 'not behind that same OL' or 'if they don't address the OL' once more I am going to choke someone.

We can add a second rounder to that group without actually getting it to respectability.

Furthermore, the difference is that some lines have issues in the middle at guard, or just a single guard or center to replace, but they have both the tackles in place. For those partially built lines, a single second round pick is often adequate to get an interior lineman who can play as a rookie and be good at what he does. This is more or less what Arizona did when they drafted Deuce Lutui in the second round after taking Matt Leinart in the first in 2006.

Deuce Lutui was never going to be asked to play left tackle because they had a need there. Four years later, he's now Arizona's best offensive lineman at a Guard position. Which is not all that uncommon for an early second round pick.

My point is: adding a Deuce Lutui (Mike Iupati/Maurkice Pouncey?) type to this offensive line doesn't really make a dent in the quality of the OL. It's probably too late to expect a turnaround in the quality of the unit at that point. Taking a LT at No. 4 guarentees you nothing, but it's unquestionably the best shot at turning the unit into a strength within a reasonable timeframe.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

We can add a second rounder to that group without actually getting it to respectability.

Furthermore, the difference is that some lines have issues in the middle at guard, or just a single guard or center to replace, but they have both the tackles in place. For those partially built lines, a single second round pick is often adequate to get an interior lineman who can play as a rookie and be good at what he does. This is more or less what Arizona did when they drafted Deuce Lutui in the second round after taking Matt Leinart in the first in 2006.

Deuce Lutui was never going to be asked to play left tackle because they had a need there. Four years later, he's now Arizona's best offensive lineman at a Guard position. Which is not all that uncommon for an early second round pick.

My point is: adding a Deuce Lutui (Mike Iupati/Maurkice Pouncey?) type to this offensive line doesn't really make a dent in the quality of the OL. It's probably too late to expect a turnaround in the quality of the unit at that point. Taking a LT at No. 4 guarentees you nothing, but it's unquestionably the best shot at turning the unit into a strength within a reasonable timeframe.

At this point I am actually fine if we go with Okung OR Bradford at #4, I won't be disappointed in either case. The issue I have is the notion that improving one area is exclusionary of improving another.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

At this point I am actually fine if we go with Okung OR Bradford at #4, I won't be disappointed in either case. The issue I have is the notion that improving one area is exclusionary of improving another.

I have a feeling if Bradford is there, we will take him. I don't think he's going to make it there though, and I don't think Shanahan will trade up for him.

Realistically though, these are pretty exclusive options. At least in the context of the argument that, "we won't be picking in the top five next year", which is hopefully accurate. This is the single best chance we will ever have to fix the offensive line via the draft. It's also the best draft position we will ever have to land a quarterback of choice. There, of course, will be other times where we can address one thing or the other, but some issue is going to be put off until later.

To me, Colt McCoy is the one way we could have our cake (offensive line at No. 4), and eat it too (potential franchise quarterback, at least as good a shot as Bradford). A lot of people don't see him in the same way I do though, so I don't have a problem with them saying that if we pass on a QB at No. 4, we can't expect to get a future star at the position in this draft.

I don't have a problem with that. If the line becomes a strength for us in 2010, suddenly the quarterbacks in future drafts who would be a good fit here become way more numerous. As well as the fact that the current guy might post a 90.0+ QB rating for the first time.

[PHazard]

I see where ur goin wit this man but think about if we go by BPA (best player available). What if in EVERY round the BPA is better than the top Olineman left. Then we end up with the same line as last year. Due to just how terrible our line is, even if we hafta take a small reach, we hafta change the line from last year.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by PHazard

I see where ur goin wit this man but think about if we go by BPA (best player available). What if in EVERY round the BPA is better than the top Olineman left. Then we end up with the same line as last year. Due to just how terrible our line is, even if we hafta take a small reach, we hafta change the line from last year.

Exactly. That's the point. The logic fail, in my eyes, is that the second round (37th overall) is being viewed as a sufficient time to start addressing needs at the expense of potential draft values. That's the point of desperation in the eyes of many.

And you can draw the desperation line there. Maybe we don't need to look exclusively at tackles at No. 4. This is a logical position. But I don't understand what makes the second round the holy-grail-of-crap-we-haven't-drafted-a-tackle-in-five-years.

You've framed it perfectly: at some point it becomes completely preposterous that you wouldn't draft a quality lineman no matter who is available as a draft steal. For a lot of people, I think that point is going to be in the second round of this upcoming draft. For me, that point was October, 2009. And neither of those perspectives is more or less "right" than the person whose threshold for not drafting a tackle is out in 2012.

I just think people are going to be pissed if they have to watch more awful Redskins line play in 2010. I'm going to be pissed if I watch another unit that I know is not as good as it should be at this point.

[PHazard]

The power of perception is ridiculous. i know everyone likes to have an opinion and stand by it. But be honest, since the end of season/mock drafts/espn/profootballtalk etc. has anyone kept one solid vision for this QB situation?

This has been hard for me. When everything started i said we need an OT @ #4. Gimmie Okung! Im a Colt Brennan supporter so i figured he could battle in camp again and hopefully beat out Jason Campbell for the spot. Being a CB supporter, you get alot of shit on this board. And even through all that shit, i stood strong. Then the 1st Mock Draft came out.

SAM BRADFORD TO THE REDSKINS says Mel Kiper! So now i get down because my big Colt Brennan plan isnt workin out how i wanted it to. Okay no biggie, ill check out film on him. Did sum research, very accurate, prototypical size (cuz hes added weight), is very smart with the football. despite his cons, Injury (not nearly as bad as drew brees's) and spread offense (but played a pro offense freshmen year), i liked what i saw and convinced myself that if we got bradford, id be okay with it.

JIMMY CLAUSEN TO THE SKINS says Mel Kiper! What the hell? What the hell could have happened that propelled Jimmy Clausen higher than Sam Bradford? So i go and look at tape, also accurate, extremely competitive, pro style offense for 3 years, threw 28 td's and 4 int's behing a bad Oline. Now despite his flaws, weaker arm and maturity issues, i convinced myself, that if we Draft Jimmy Clausen id be okay with it.

Now when i researched bradford and compared him to clausen, i liked bradford more. And when i researched clausen and compared him to bradford, i liked clausen more. When i clamored for Brennan, i spoke about the "IT" factor. So when comparing the two QB's, i realized there are TWO different types of IT factor. Theres the Peyton Manning IT factor (smart, lead by example, support your team) and theres the Phillip Rivers IT factor (Big RAH RAH guy, attitude, big voice, celebrates) Bradford looks to have the Manning factor while Clausen looks to have the Rivers factor. But at the same time, i would put Jason Campbell in the Manning IT factor failures and i would put Ryan Leaf in the Rivers IT factor failures. So nothing is guaranteed.

And now someone mentioned today that Kyle Shanahan likes Colt Brennan and his attitude/what he brings to the table. It may or may not even be true but it made me realize how far i had let other opinions influence how i felt. So after that whirlwind of opinions, imma go back to hoping Brennan comes out our starter and we grab Okung or Davis with the #4 pick (whoever is rated better) Perception is everything and i trust Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan to do what is right for the Washington Redskins. HTTR!

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by PHazard

The power of perception is ridiculous. i know everyone likes to have an opinion and stand by it. But be honest, since the end of season/mock drafts/espn/profootballtalk etc. has anyone kept one solid vision for this QB situation?

Yes.

And I sure as hell hope the FO has.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by PHazard

The power of perception is ridiculous. i know everyone likes to have an opinion and stand by it. But be honest, since the end of season/mock drafts/espn/profootballtalk etc. has anyone kept one solid vision for this QB situation?

This has been hard for me. When everything started i said we need an OT @ #4. Gimmie Okung! Im a Colt Brennan supporter so i figured he could battle in camp again and hopefully beat out Jason Campbell for the spot. Being a CB supporter, you get alot of shit on this board. And even through all that shit, i stood strong. Then the 1st Mock Draft came out.

SAM BRADFORD TO THE REDSKINS says Mel Kiper! So now i get down because my big Colt Brennan plan isnt workin out how i wanted it to. Okay no biggie, ill check out film on him. Did sum research, very accurate, prototypical size (cuz hes added weight), is very smart with the football. despite his cons, Injury (not nearly as bad as drew brees's) and spread offense (but played a pro offense freshmen year), i liked what i saw and convinced myself that if we got bradford, id be okay with it.

JIMMY CLAUSEN TO THE SKINS says Mel Kiper! What the hell? What the hell could have happened that propelled Jimmy Clausen higher than Sam Bradford? So i go and look at tape, also accurate, extremely competitive, pro style offense for 3 years, threw 28 td's and 4 int's behing a bad Oline. Now despite his flaws, weaker arm and maturity issues, i convinced myself, that if we Draft Jimmy Clausen id be okay with it.

Now when i researched bradford and compared him to clausen, i liked bradford more. And when i researched clausen and compared him to bradford, i liked clausen more. When i clamored for Brennan, i spoke about the "IT" factor. So when comparing the two QB's, i realized there are TWO different types of IT factor. Theres the Peyton Manning IT factor (smart, lead by example, support your team) and theres the Phillip Rivers IT factor (Big RAH RAH guy, attitude, big voice, celebrates) Bradford looks to have the Manning factor while Clausen looks to have the Rivers factor. But at the same time, i would put Jason Campbell in the Manning IT factor failures and i would put Ryan Leaf in the Rivers IT factor failures. So nothing is guaranteed.

And now someone mentioned today that Kyle Shanahan likes Colt Brennan and his attitude/what he brings to the table. It may or may not even be true but it made me realize how far i had let other opinions influence how i felt. So after that whirlwind of opinions, imma go back to hoping Brennan comes out our starter and we grab Okung or Davis with the #4 pick (whoever is rated better) Perception is everything and i trust Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan to do what is right for the Washington Redskins. HTTR!

Where did you copy this from?

[PHazard]

Originally Posted by mredskins

Where did you copy this from?

I didnt copy it man i wrote it. Ive prolly been puttin in as much time as Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan this offseason but i dont get paid lol sad insight to my life.

-Haz

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by PHazard

I didnt copy it man i wrote it. Ive prolly been puttin in as much time as Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan this offseason but i dont get paid lol sad insight to my life.

-Haz

Just interesting how your grammar and level of vocabulary became so good for one post, now it looks like from this post you are back to your old tricks. Just interesting.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by mredskins

Just interesting how your grammar and level of vocabulary became so good for one post, now it looks like from this post you are back to your old tricks. Just interesting.

it's more likely to start typing closer to properly when putting together a substantial post

there were still plenty of "gimmie" "alot" "ill (instead of I'll)"

[PHazard]

Last time I checked, this was a football forum and not an english class. Are you so bored with this forum that you must post about others spelling instead of football? I never claimed to be a guru. Sure, you can look at Ryan Leaf now and say "wow, he sucked." But at the time he came out in the draft, they said he had an IT factor. They said he had an attitude but was more NFL ready than Manning. That's why there was a controversy about who would be the 1st overall pick. So don't act all "haha he doesn't know anything about football because he is comparing Ryan Leaf to Phillip River hahaha." It was an observation.