57 Mocks Munched! Suh Consensus No. 1, Bradford for Skins

I guarantee you that one of these people will be a redskin come April. I say Okung.

Give me #76 in the 1st round
Give me #71 in the 2nd round
Give me #13 in the 4th round (I like him)

Only thing that worries me about that is the fact that Jacksonville went 8-8 this year, add to that the fact that a good amount of people have said that Garrard and Campbell seem to be similar players and you wonder if it would just result in another mediocre year. Then again maybe we have better coaching and could do more with a similar level of talent. Of course obviously things don't exactly translate (ie if Team X did this then when we do that we'll get the same result as Team X).

That would not be a move to win next year but for years to come. It would be possible that because it would be an upgrade and coupled with better coaching we could be alot better. But 8-8 next year would be better than most people would expect for us.

We don't need Bradford or Clausen. We need offensive linemen! Then after we fix the line, get a QB.

We don't need Bradford or Clausen. We need offensive linemen! Then after we fix the line, get a QB.

Where do we get the QB? Do we do the Gruden system where we draft every QB under the sun and hope that one of the 5 QB's that ends up on our roster develops despite lack of reps?

If we end up taking our QB in the next two years then thats one or two years worth of development we miss out on, not to mention the fact that trading up to get the QB prospect we want is probably going to cost us as much as a 2nd and 3rd round pick. Thats possibly two offensive lineman or at the very least two starters.

Do you really want to trade the farm for Jake Locker and his 58% completion percentage or Bradford and his 65%+ completion percentage? Not to mention the fact that Bradford is one of the most accurate QB's to come out of college in a long time. Did I mention that he put up huge numbers in a pro style offense as a red shirt freshman (36 TD's 8 Int's), then got a whole new system the next year only to win the Heisman?

If we're going to take a QB, then we're going to do it now. We're in as good of a position as ever and when it comes down to it we only need to find one or two QB's.

On the other hand we're going to need as many as 7 quality offensive lineman and passing on a QB of Bradfords caliber is just simply bad judegement. Okung is dominant, but the fact of the matter is Bradford is a better QB then Okung is a Tackle. My only hope is that the Rams get scared off by Bradfords shoulder and take Clausen or Suh.

In the end if you're building for the long run you take the QB now and spend four or five picks over the next two years, along with free agents, to rebuild the O-Line. Thinking you can completely fix the O-Line in one offseason is pretty far fetched.

Also before I forget just take a look at the O-Lines in the Super Bowl. You have one first round pick playing in it and he was picked at 13 (Jamaal Brown). The rest were well scouted guys that were picked after the first. The Saints for example have a 1st and 2nd at tackle, a 4th and 5th at Guard (the best Guard Tandem in the league), and a 5th at center.

The Colts have an UDFA and 4th at Tackle, Two UDFA's (including former Redskin Kyle DeVan), and an UDFA at Center. Behind those guys they have two second round picks that will probably end up taking over in the next year or two.

Where do we get the QB? Do we do the Gruden system where we draft every QB under the sun and hope that one of the 5 QB's that ends up on our roster develops despite lack of reps?

If we end up taking our QB in the next two years then thats one or two years worth of development we miss out on, not to mention the fact that trading up to get the QB prospect we want is probably going to cost us as much as a 2nd and 3rd round pick. Thats possibly two offensive lineman or at the very least two starters.

Do you really want to trade the farm for Jake Locker and his 58% completion percentage or Bradford and his 65%+ completion percentage? Not to mention the fact that Bradford is one of the most accurate QB's to come out of college in a long time. Did I mention that he put up huge numbers in a pro style offense as a red shirt freshman (36 TD's 8 Int's), then got a whole new system the next year only to win the Heisman?

If we're going to take a QB, then we're going to do it now. We're in as good of a position as ever and when it comes down to it we only need to find one or two QB's.

On the other hand we're going to need as many as 7 quality offensive lineman and passing on a QB of Bradfords caliber is just simply bad judegement. Okung is dominant, but the fact of the matter is Bradford is a better QB then Okung is a Tackle. My only hope is that the Rams get scared off by Bradfords shoulder and take Clausen or Suh.

In the end if you're building for the long run you take the QB now and spend four or five picks over the next two years, along with free agents, to rebuild the O-Line. Thinking you can completely fix the O-Line in one offseason is pretty far fetched.

On the NFL level I think that is yet to be decided. Even though Bradford has a ton of potential, he also has many more questions about his transition to the pros than Okung. I haven't seen a scouting report yet that didn't project Okung to be a starter from day one.

Tenatively, I have the following projections on the QB class:

1. McCoy, 1st round (middle third)
2. Clausen, 1st round (middle third)
3. Bradford, 1st round (middle third)
4. Tebow, 1st round (lower third)
5. Pike, 3rd round
6. LeFevour, 3rd round
7. Kafka, 4th round
8. Zac Robinson, 4th round
9. Max Hall, 4th round
10. Jarrett Brown, 5th round
11. Bill Stull, 5th round
12. Sean Canfield, 7th round
13. Jevan Snead, priority UDFA

I don't have a grade on Skelton yet, he could be as high as No. 5, or as low as the 6th round.

For the record, my grades last year gave me this:

1. Josh Freeman, 2nd round
2. Matt Stafford, 2nd round
3. Nate Davis, 3rd round
4. Graham Harrell, 3rd round
5. Pat White, 4th round
6. Mark Sanchez, 4th round
7. Brian Hoyer, Priority UDFA

This year's class is MUCH deeper, and generally stronger. But there's still no ideal top ten picks.

On the NFL level I think that is yet to be decided. Even though Bradford has a ton of potential, he also has many more questions about his transition to the pros than Okung. I haven't seen a scouting report yet that didn't project Okung to be a starter from day one.

I agree on Okung. He's definitely a starter from day 1 but to be Super Bowl contenders on an annual basis you need a franchise QB. Even the Vikings who built all the grunt positions had trouble getting anywhere without a QB. I know people are going to cite the Jets but I'll continue to insist that they were very lucky and you can't count on how they won this year to get you to the playoffs never mind the Super Bowl.

They will be very dependent next year on the development of Sanchez to be contenders otherwise they'll have to hope they get two teams that lie down in the last two weeks then play against horrible placekickers come playoff time.

One of the things though that I like about Bradford is the fact that his numbers in a pro style system as a Redshirt Freshman were better then Eli Manning coming out as a Senior. Heck they were comparable to Phillip Rivers as a senior. The guy is off the charts in everything you want in a QB except for health and thats likely to be fine in the long run. Besides Bradford likely won't play in 2010. Still the accuracy, production, and intangibles are to much to pass up on. Especially the production. Just compare him to any QB coming out in the past decade and you'll be hard pressed to find QB's that didn't go to Texas Tech with stats comprable to Bradford.


This year's class is MUCH deeper, and generally stronger. But there's still no ideal top ten picks.

Ha ha, is there even such a thing as an ideal top 10 pick at QB? Even Peyton had his doubters when he was drafted. In fact last QB I can remember that drew minimal complaints when drafted 1st overall was Michael Vick and look how that turned out.

Ha ha, is there even such a thing as an ideal top 10 pick at QB? Even Peyton had his doubters when he was drafted. In fact last QB I can remember that drew minimal complaints when drafted 1st overall was Michael Vick and look how that turned out.The 2004 class had a few of them. No one really complained about Eli at No. 1, only about the ridiculous trade that the Giants made to get him. And Roethlisberger would not have been considered a reach at No. 2 overall, he just happened to slide a little bit.

Rivers didn't get a whole lot of draft pub that year, but it was hard to find a flaw in his game outside of his funky delivery. I don't think being ignored is the same as having major flaws.

Bradford is certainly not in the same class as those three, although I agree that he (if not McCoy) is the highest efficiency college player in the draft. Higher than Tebow, even.

And the 2006 class certainly had top ten types. I think you could argue that they were all top ten types. Palmer in 2003 as well.

None of the 2006 picks have been managaed particularly well, despite the fact that Fisher and Whisenhunt, and to a lesser extent, Shanahan, are among they best coaches in the game.