Sam Bradford now leads to Redskins

[CultBrennan59]

I'm happy with Bradford, because his strength is his accuracy. He knows how to get the ball to his receivers. You know how many times Jason under throws or over throws receivers or just flat out misses wide open receivers? A lot. And by the way, for all the people who think that Bradford will be worse than stafford, Bradford last year had a much higher grading and rating than stafford, it's no question that he would have been a Detroit Lion had he of declared last year. If we don't get Bradford it means will draft an OL in the first round and have either Colt, Woodson, or possible Chase Daniels as our QB next year which I'd be ok with.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

I'm happy with Bradford, because his strength is his accuracy. He knows how to get the ball to his receivers. You know how many times Jason under throws or over throws receivers or just flat out misses wide open receivers? A lot. And by the way, for all the people who think that Bradford will be worse than stafford, Bradford last year had a much higher grading and rating than stafford, it's no question that he would have been a Detroit Lion had he of declared last year. If we don't get Bradford it means will draft an OL in the first round and have either Colt, Woodson, or possible Chase Daniels as our QB next year which I'd be ok with.

I don't expect Bradford or any rookie to come in and play great from the get-go, but if we get a great one, they will eventually help the O line (and receivers for that matter) look good. The same O line that everyone raves about in New England gave up the second most sacks last year. Why? because they had an inferior QB under center. Same thing happened when TC came in a few years back. A QB who makes good, quick decisions and accurate throws keeps Defenses on their heels and takes the pressure off the O linemen. Beleedat!

[Lotus]

We should put Haynesworth at qb and make the qb sneak the centerpiece of our offense. Miami can have its Wildcat because we would have the Bulldozer.

[wilsowilso]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

There are going to be a few QBs drafted in the first round next year that go on to become great NFL QBs, maybe even Hall of Famers.

The chances that this statement proves true are remote at best.

Great NFL QB's don't grow on trees. They are very rare. Maybe one per year on average graduates to the NFL.

[Kalisto2010]

I really like Jake Locker. He has a cannon and he's very mobile. The poise he showed in the USC game was tremendous. We need a QB like that who can rise to the occasion once we play our NFC east opponents. Clausen would be a solid choice also.

[30gut]

Does Sam Bradford come with Trent Williams?
Kinda like a package deal?

[Ruhskins]

Picking up a QB in the first round, who has twice injured his throwing shoulder and did not play in his entire final college season, is probably one of the most laughable things I keep hearing from fans.

Unless there is absofuckinglutely no possibility for the team to pick up a franchise tackle (funny how people forget how well things worked the last time we picked one of those) with our first round pick, then the team should look into other options.

As much as people get a boner when they talk about Parcells and how great of a GM he is, they should take a page from his book. He built his o-line by drafting a franchise tackle (he could have picked up Ryan, Flacco, or Quinn in that draft) and picking up his right tackle in the later rounds (Vernon Carey). He picked up a decent veteran QB (Pennington) and drafted his QB of the future in the 2nd round in 2008 (Henne).

[djnemo65]

While I think specific arguments can be made against all the QB's coming out this year, and should be, anyone saying that the Redskins shouldn't draft a QB on principle because the team has more glaring needs or whatever is out of their mind. This team is headed for a total rebuild on the offensive side and that has to start with QB. Now if you don't believe in the guys available when we pick you can put it off for another year, but getting a franchise qb either this year or next should be the absolute number one priority of this team. After all, no one has won a Superbowl with a free agent QB since 2002, and there's been only two teams since our last win in 91 to capture a championship without a superstar/ hall of fame type player behind center (Ravens and Bucs).

As for Bradford, Gtripp's analysis is basically spot on. Drafting a qb in the top 10 with an injured throwing arm is dicey, and the fact that Adrian Peterson has turned out to be great does not mitigate that risk for me. That being said, when healthy he has more than demonstrated the ability to succeed in a pro-style offense, which is increasingly rare for college qb's these days.

[Kalisto2010]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Picking up a QB in the first round, who has twice injured his throwing shoulder and did not play in his entire final college season, is probably one of the most laughable things I keep hearing from fans.

This^^^

[MTK]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

While I think specific arguments can be made against all the QB's coming out this year, and should be, anyone saying that the Redskins shouldn't draft a QB on principle because the team has more glaring needs or whatever is out of their mind. This team is headed for a total rebuild on the offensive side and that has to start with QB. Now if you don't believe in the guys available when we pick you can put it off for another year, but getting a franchise qb either this year or next should be the absolute number one priority of this team. After all, no one has won a Superbowl with a free agent QB since 2002, and there's been only two teams since our last win in 91 to capture a championship without a superstar/ hall of fame type player behind center (Ravens and Bucs).

As for Bradford, Gtripp's analysis is basically spot on. Drafting a qb in the top 10 with an injured throwing arm is dicey, and the fact that Adrian Peterson has turned out to be great does not mitigate that risk for me. That being said, when healthy he has more than demonstrated the ability to succeed in a pro-style offense, which is increasingly rare for college qb's these days.

Well said, I can't disagree with anything here.

[Monkeydad]

According to your blog and a prior report by ESPN...not a story at least yet:

http://www.thewarpath.net/620354-post285.html

Originally Posted by Buster

Saw on ESPN News earlier in the week a story that the Skins will know better than anyone else if Bradford is able to play and is good healthwise because Dr. James Andrews did his surgery and is our team doc.

I guess they have a point, other teams may be wavering about his durability but we'll know better than them either way, but really, it's not much of a story.

Healthy or not, I don't want us to draft him in the 1st round. We need a line.

I thought we weren't supposed to link to our blogs anymore?

[MTK]

This site is not a blog.

[rbanerjee23]

I swear, if the Skins actually keep this pick instead of trading away and building the O-line, I am going to s*** a brick.

[skinsfan69]

Can someone tell me what is so good about Bradford? I've only seen him play once, last year in the title game. He looked good. He didn't look like a can't miss and if I remember he was in shotgun the whole time.

Clausen really looks like a pro QB to me..... and I would in no way shape or form even think about McCoy or Tebow.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The problem though is that whoever takes him is going to have to make a decision on him, more or less "in the dark" on his physical state.

I mean, every team will have medical reports on him, but no one is going to get to see him throw the football before his personal workout, and those are somewhat valueless anyway because it's not a standardized field like the combine, or at least a pro day.

So it makes him the ultimate high-risk, high-reward prospect. On the pro side, he was really, really good in pretty much perfect conditions two years ago. On the downside, what have you done for me lately? Not a whole lot.

Clausen is much safer because of that, but it's because he's safer that we don't have a chance in hell of getting him. Not that he'd be a good investment with this team anyway.

Why? We're looking at 3-13 IMO. What teams that are worse than us needs a qb. Clev, STL, Oak...if they give up on Russell.