Updated: Redskins to hold private workouts with Tebow and Bradford

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

that always struck me as ridiculous. why would God pick one team over another in a sporting contest?

Notice that God is the most fickle of fans: he loves your team this week but hates it the next.

[Hog1]

[QUOTE=tryfuhl;677898]Because they prayed harder!

j/k

If Tebow wants to pray I have no problem with that, but he can keep it to himself or get to know the individuals around him well enough to know whom he should invite to participate.

I'm not religious myself but before every wrestling match our team did The Lord's Prayer, it was a unity thing and well, coach led it so I wasn't saying no.

Anyways, Tebow's prayer didn't help him much on his Wonderlic. Maybe we'll see him on celebrity are you smarter than a 5th grader in the future.[/QUOTE]

How......do you know what he prays about?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

??? What does that mean?

It points out that a majority of high-efficiency college quarterbacks who lack NFL build have tended to drop significantly in the draft (rightly or wrongly, I'm not passing judgment) to later rounds despite their awesome accomplishments on the field. High first round projections are usually given to those who fit one of three molds: pro style signal caller (Clausen fits this, as does Rivers, Rodgers, Campbell, Quinn, and Eli Manning), raw but toolzy underclassman with a high ceiling (Locker, if he had come out, or Sanchez, etc), or projectable gun with quick release/rocket arm (Stafford, Russell, maybe Roethlisberger).

Bradford comes from a completely different angle: supreme college production at a big time program. In the past, those players have tended to be downgraded to the second round or lower do to concerns about adaptability.

If you wanted to disprove my point, I suppose citing Alex Smith would work as an example of someone who didn't fit neatly as a projectable player, but went at the top of the draft anyway, but I'm not sure that would alleviate concerns about franchise-ness.

I've never said I thought Bradford will suck, but the "we have to trade up to get him" mentality is getting a little pervasive, and I needed to present a different way of looking at a player, who, when you take him, his college resume of a Heisman and a 67% completion percentage is all you are getting.

In all fairness, all that matters is that his numbers translate well to the pro level. If they translate really well, he's not an overdraft no matter where he goes. But from a historical scouting standpoint, Bradford, without assuming intangibles we can't imply, has the build of a mid-to-late rounder. For every Romo or Garcia that comes out of the mold to make it, there's a Gradkowski, Frye, or Graham Harrell that doesn't really catch on. But the thing that they all had in common was that no one had to put much down investment on any of them, and could afford to cut bait with the guys who just couldn't play.

It's a different way to look at the "we can't pass him up" mentality. How confident are you (Redskins fan, not necessarily SmootSmack) that his numbers will translate to the pro level, and how much money are you willing to bet that you are right?

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Hog1

How......do you know what he prays about?

I hope he wasn't praying to get a 22. Take a sample test, they're ridiculously easy. I haven't been in school for years and have gotten 43-50 on every one that I've taken.

[GTripp0012]

The short version of the above is that Bradford, without his numbers and accolades at Oklahoma, has no value as a prospect. So you need to have a good reason to think you can take what he did in college, and adapt it to your system.

Clausen, on the other hand, if you build him a boat load of talent relative to opposing defenses, he's going to be quite successful regardless of system. That talent thing is easier said than done, obviously, but there's little projection that has to go into Clausen as a prospect. If things around him are bad, he'll struggle, and if things around him are good, he will perform.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

It points out that a majority of high-efficiency college quarterbacks who lack NFL build have tended to drop significantly in the draft (rightly or wrongly, I'm not passing judgment) to later rounds despite their awesome accomplishments on the field. High first round projections are usually given to those who fit one of three molds: pro style signal caller (Clausen fits this, as does Rivers, Rodgers, Campbell, Quinn, and Eli Manning), raw but toolzy underclassman with a high ceiling (Locker, if he had come out, or Sanchez, etc), or projectable gun with quick release/rocket arm (Stafford, Russell, maybe Roethlisberger).

Bradford comes from a completely different angle: supreme college production at a big time program. In the past, those players have tended to be downgraded to the second round or lower do to concerns about adaptability.

If you wanted to disprove my point, I suppose citing Alex Smith would work as an example of someone who didn't fit neatly as a projectable player, but went at the top of the draft anyway, but I'm not sure that would alleviate concerns about franchise-ness.

I've never said I thought Bradford will suck, but the "we have to trade up to get him" mentality is getting a little pervasive, and I needed to present a different way of looking at a player, who, when you take him, his college resume of a Heisman and a 67% completion percentage is all you are getting.

In all fairness, all that matters is that his numbers translate well to the pro level. If they translate really well, he's not an overdraft no matter where he goes. But from a historical scouting standpoint, Bradford, without assuming intangibles we can't imply, has the build of a mid-to-late rounder. For every Romo or Garcia that comes out of the mold to make it, there's a Gradkowski, Frye, or Graham Harrell that doesn't really catch on. But the thing that they all had in common was that no one had to put much down investment on any of them, and could afford to cut bait with the guys who just couldn't play.

It's a different way to look at the "we can't pass him up" mentality. How confident are you (Redskins fan, not necessarily SmootSmack) that his numbers will translate to the pro level, and how much money are you willing to bet that you are right?

I'm even more confused by your point now, sort of sorry I asked

[celts32]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

It points out that a majority of high-efficiency college quarterbacks who lack NFL build have tended to drop significantly in the draft (rightly or wrongly, I'm not passing judgment) to later rounds despite their awesome accomplishments on the field. High first round projections are usually given to those who fit one of three molds: pro style signal caller (Clausen fits this, as does Rivers, Rodgers, Campbell, Quinn, and Eli Manning), raw but toolzy underclassman with a high ceiling (Locker, if he had come out, or Sanchez, etc), or projectable gun with quick release/rocket arm (Stafford, Russell, maybe Roethlisberger).

Bradford comes from a completely different angle: supreme college production at a big time program. In the past, those players have tended to be downgraded to the second round or lower do to concerns about adaptability.

If you wanted to disprove my point, I suppose citing Alex Smith would work as an example of someone who didn't fit neatly as a projectable player, but went at the top of the draft anyway, but I'm not sure that would alleviate concerns about franchise-ness.

I've never said I thought Bradford will suck, but the "we have to trade up to get him" mentality is getting a little pervasive, and I needed to present a different way of looking at a player, who, when you take him, his college resume of a Heisman and a 67% completion percentage is all you are getting.

In all fairness, all that matters is that his numbers translate well to the pro level. If they translate really well, he's not an overdraft no matter where he goes. But from a historical scouting standpoint, Bradford, without assuming intangibles we can't imply, has the build of a mid-to-late rounder. For every Romo or Garcia that comes out of the mold to make it, there's a Gradkowski, Frye, or Graham Harrell that doesn't really catch on. But the thing that they all had in common was that no one had to put much down investment on any of them, and could afford to cut bait with the guys who just couldn't play.

It's a different way to look at the "we can't pass him up" mentality. How confident are you (Redskins fan, not necessarily SmootSmack) that his numbers will translate to the pro level, and how much money are you willing to bet that you are right?

You said Bradford has the build of a mid to late rounder? Do you mean size wise? Bradford measured 6’4” 236 at the combine. He has prototype NFL QB size.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

neither clausen or bradford is worthy of a top 5 pick. in an honest competition, i dont think either of them would beat out campbell, grossman, or pineapple jesus in practice.