Bradford/Clausen now split among Mock Drafts

[WaldSkins]

It's not like if we draft Bradford that we are going to ignore the Oline. We still have free agency, trades, and picks in rounds 2,4,5 and 7 to address the line. The line will be addressed,it's just a matter of how.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by WaldSkins

It's not like if we draft Bradford that we are going to ignore the Oline. We still have free agency, trades, and picks in rounds 2,4,5 and 7 to address the line. The line will be addressed,it's just a matter of how.

I just don't understand how you could justify taking a QB at #4 (being a weak QB class according to pundits) and ignoring the disgusting play by the offensive line last season.

Given the success of first round tackles over the past few seasons, to me taking a QB with that #4 is not an option. If Okung is not available at #4, then the next best solution is to trade down and get more picks and still pick up a tackle with the first rounder.

Honestly, with the uncapped year free agency is going to be pretty bad, and most of your young talented players are going to be RFAs. Trading picks for players is something that I don't want to see happen in this team for a loong time. And to me saying "we'll take care of the line with the later rounds" sounds a lot like Vinny Cerrato.

[WaldSkins]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I just don't understand how you could justify taking a QB at #4 (being a weak QB class according to pundits) and ignoring the disgusting play by the offensive line last season.

Given the success of first round tackles over the past few seasons, to me taking a QB with that #4 is not an option. If Okung is not available at #4, then the next best solution is to trade down and get more picks and still pick up a tackle with the first rounder.

Honestly, with the uncapped year free agency is going to be pretty bad, and most of your young talented players are going to be RFAs. Trading picks for players is something that I don't want to see happen in this team for a loong time. And to me saying "we'll take care of the line with the later rounds" sounds a lot like Vinny Cerrato.

1.) I never said that we should take a QB at #4.
2.) Just because it's a weak QB class doesn't mean that Bradford isn't worthy of a top ten pick (He would have been the #1 QB off the board last year if he didn't return to school)
3.)If Okung is gone and we can't trade back who do you select?
4.)Cerrato didn't really address the line with later picks, he always seemed to go for LB's and speacial team players in the later rounds.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by WaldSkins

1.) I never said that we should take a QB at #4.
2.) Just because it's a weak QB class doesn't mean that Bradford isn't worthy of a top ten pick (He would have been the #1 QB off the board last year if he didn't return to school)
3.)If Okung is gone and we can't trade back who do you select?
4.)Cerrato didn't really address the line with later picks, he always seemed to go for LB's and speacial team players in the later rounds.

It's not just you, it seems like a everyone is saying this, "we must pick a QB at #4, we must pick a QB at #4".

I'm sure that if Bradford is there at #4, there will be some interest for that pick by a few teams that are in desperate need of a QB.

And Cerrato didn't address the line period. We always seem to pick up old lineman as a way to patch things up.

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by WaldSkins

1.) I never said that we should take a QB at #4.
2.) Just because it's a weak QB class doesn't mean that Bradford isn't worthy of a top ten pick (He would have been the #1 QB off the board last year if he didn't return to school)
3.)If Okung is gone and we can't trade back who do you select?
4.)Cerrato didn't really address the line with later picks, he always seemed to go for LB's and speacial team players in the later rounds.

i think it is the complete opposite, there might not be a manning, or a rivers thats a lock to go number one, but as far as depth goes i have been saying for a while that there is a ton of depth at the qb position you can get a guy like snead pike, mccoy, or smoots boy from fordham, in the later rounds. i see no reason to take a qb at number 4 overall unless shanny really falls in love with him. i'm alaborad the eric berry bandwagon, but what i would love is to trade down i just don't see anyone doing that

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by WaldSkins

1.) I never said that we should take a QB at #4.
2.) Just because it's a weak QB class doesn't mean that Bradford isn't worthy of a top ten pick (He would have been the #1 QB off the board last year if he didn't return to school)
3.)If Okung is gone and we can't trade back who do you select?
4.)Cerrato didn't really address the line with later picks, he always seemed to go for LB's and speacial team players in the later rounds.

If he's not gone, you take him. After the combine we may find that Davis, Campbell, or another LT is worth the pick if he is gone and we can't trade back. If not, there are other players/positions to consider also. Obviously Suh, Berry, McCoy and McClain can't all be gone if Okung is off the board. Joe Haden would be a nice addition also. But obviously if the staff thinks Bradford or Clausen are a once in a decade type of QB, they'll probably pick one of them. I personaly have no problem at all with taking a highly regarded LT with our first pick. I wish we would have done more of it in the last 10 years. Picking a franchise LT with the #4 pick isn't such a bad thing. If you get a chance to get a FLT you take him. If they pick a QB I can only assume they feel JC cannot win in this league, which I disagree with, and the QB they draft is going to be much better. Of course whatever they do I'll probably be behind it, I just hope it's the right thing. And I'm a big fan of Bradford.

[Dirtbag59]

Alright, I know I'm not a scout but whats so damn appealing about Anthony Davis besides his measureables? The fact that he is even mentioned in the same sentence as Okung is enough to make my head spin. Unless I see something else on the guy besides Todd McShay's word I'm going to have to go on record as saying that I will be very disapointed if we draft him. I mean maybe I'm wrong but compared to Okung his draft video is less then impressive.

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

Alright, I know I'm not a scout but whats so damn appealing about Anthony Davis besides his measureables? The fact that he is even mentioned in the same sentence as Okung is enough to make my head spin. Unless I see something else on the guy besides Todd McShay's word I'm going to have to go on record as saying that I will be very disapointed if we draft him. I mean maybe I'm wrong but compared to Okung his draft video is less then impressive.

i was under the impression that these guys don't really fit a typical shanny o lineman, maybe i'm wrong, it does happen

[WaldSkins]

Originally Posted by mlmdub130

i was under the impression that these guys don't really fit a typical shanny o lineman, maybe i'm wrong, it does happen

Rutgers runs a zone blocking scheme similar to what Shanny runs.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by WaldSkins

It's not like if we draft Bradford that we are going to ignore the Oline. We still have free agency, trades, and picks in rounds 2,4,5 and 7 to address the line. The line will be addressed,it's just a matter of how.

Totally with you on this.