WPC: Is Bradford still in play for Redskins?

[Mad Mike]

Bradford = Ryan Leaf 3.0..... i guarantee it

Where is that "dumbest thing you've heard a fan say" thread when you need it. :doh:

[bobisimo]

I saw this and would be okay with it. LT in the 1st. McCoy in the 2nd. We go from there.....

I like how Bradford moves in the pocket and his short-range accuracy. I like Clausen's fire and attitude and performance. I don't know much about McCoy other than that people feel he is underrated. All that said, your comment is my ideal strategy. Grab Okung or trade down a little and get the next best OL if Okung is gone. And grab McCoy at the top of the 2nd if he's still there. If the team can pull that off, it'll be exciting.

[Chump Bailey]

I was surprised to see him listed at about 6'4, 225. He looked a lot smaller out there playing.

I think he'd look good in a Skins jersey, but I have a feeling the Rams are gonna grab him.

The Rams are kicking themselves for passing on Matt Ryan. They won't make the same mistake twice in all likelihood, which does not bode well for those of us wanting Sam obviously. Hopefully they look strong at Okung. They took Smith last year. They could move him to RT and take Okung and have their bookends in place.

[jflow78]

Thanks PCS, I got my gold star bein' all respectable like. My mom would be so proud.

Things are going to flip flop multiple times before the draft. A month ago, here in St. Louis, they were talking about Suh being the no brainer at #1 and trying to find a QB in some other way, or just keeping Bulger since it's a no cap year. Then they talked about trading for a QB. Now they're talking about taking Bradford, but the honest to goodness last thing I heard from someone who was being interviewed from Ram's Park was, "Right now, Clausen is higher rated than Bradford." The specific reasoning behind it was because of the shoulder, and because Clausen was in a "pro offense" while Bradford was a shotgun spread guy.

Now if he comes out and has no problem throwing forty yard bullets and 60 yard bombs, we can probably say bye bye to him and try to figure out where we're going (hopefully trade back).

I have to admit, I am kind of intrigued by some of the 2nd round QBs, I don't know if I like their chances, but some of them can make the argument that they're worth taking a chance on. Especially since, if the cap comes back next season, we won't have thrown half our cap number at one guy who (god forbid) doesn't turn out. If a 2nd rounder didn't turn out, it wouldn't hurt so bad taking a chance on another QB, but if #4 ends up going bad, OMG we're toast for half a decade. It's scary, not scary enough not to try, but scary.

[skinsfanno9]

I really think we're looking at a second round QB pick. Nobody is looking at the top QBs as the second coming of Elway, which means it makes better sense from a value standpoint to take a chance on a decent QB later. Assuming we can't move down, I'd be really surprised if we didn't see Okung with the #4. I think we're far more likely to see Colt McCoy or perhaps someone like a Dan LeFevour, a very accurate QB with good decision making, as our selection in the second.

[Jumbo]

Nicely said Jflow. Something that can be said to other PRESENT members of the site as well.

As for Bradford. Tough to say. I'm not convinced that the Redskins were sure he'd be there at #4 in the first place. However,this all of this does make the upcoming draft more than a little interesting.

First, two OT things that stand out to me is the now-gone dude had no idea how fast PCS can slap leather and that Jflow is obviously a man to listen to when he speaks of forum conduct.

Per the topic, I can certainly see (and be fine with) Okung @ 4, even though I am fairly Pavlovian about taking a QB and addressing our OL needs. Per the knocks on either Clausen or Bradford, I am no college expert, but I see them too. However, what I see as their upside, and given (simplistic as it may sound) my current faith in the FO's decision making, I will be happy if either are available and chosen @ 4 (Bradford most IMO) and we enter the season with JC, either one of them, and CB5. I don't see a worthy OL prospect currently worth a #4 pick, so trading down is on my mind, too. But I have no way of really knowing how likely such may be and am not one to pull specific speculations with little substance to base it on.

[alwaysaskin]

Here are the red flags for me for both Bradford and Clausen

Bradford:

Spread QB

If the Rams pass on him, that means his shoulder is nowhere near where it should be

Looked Very Pedestrian against the Texas and Florida Defenses, while putting up huge numbers against other big 12 teams (Look at a team like Kansas, where they really have nothing in the way of defense)

rarely played under center

Clausen:

15-21 as a starter

Losses against Navy, Syracuse

Poor performances in big games, especially against USC

Superior talent at Wide Receiver

Questions about his personality

Neither one of these guys stands out as a franchise QB. Though at this point I would have the same injury concerns about Colt McCoy. LeFevour is the only QB I like out of this class.

Finally we need an Okung. No the kick me in the jimmy scenario would have the Lions taking Okung. I don't think Davis is worth a #4. If we could trade back and pick up Bulaga I'd be all for it. If worse comes to worse, I'd say we bite the bullet and pick Davis at #4

[bobisimo]

The Rams are kicking themselves for passing on Matt Ryan. They won't make the same mistake twice in all likelihood, which does not bode well for those of us wanting Sam obviously. Hopefully they look strong at Okung. They took Smith last year. They could move him to RT and take Okung and have their bookends in place.

Maybe this is wishful thinking, but... just because they've passed on Stafford and Ryan doesn't mean they'll automatically want to correct that mistake and get Bradford this time. They may feel that Bradford would be unfairly compared to Stafford and Ryan and want to avoid that comparison. It's really hard to tell what any of the early drafters are going to do. I can't remember being this curious about a draft in some time.

[terrifNick21]

28/39 387 yards 5 TDs 2 INTs against Texas in 2008 is pedestrian?

How about 26/41 256 yards 2 TDs 2 INTs against FLA in the National title game?

How those are pedestrian is beyond me.

[TheDiplomat]

I like how Bradford moves in the pocket and his short-range accuracy. I like Clausen's fire and attitude and performance. I don't know much about McCoy other than that people feel he is underrated. All that said, your comment is my ideal strategy. Grab Okung or trade down a little and get the next best OL if Okung is gone. And grab McCoy at the top of the 2nd if he's still there. If the team can pull that off, it'll be exciting.

Very exciting and I agree that McCoy is underrated. He's easily the most experienced and seasoned QB coming out. He's mobile and accurate (which Shanahan LOVES and has harped on) tough, a winner, and a great character guy. His height might push him to the 2nd round which is fine. Also being a 2nd rounder I think less ppl would be upset if he sits for a year. Plus that one year of sitting might help with the "adjustment" so many ppl are worried about considering his offense at UT. I'm ALL for it.

[Mad Mike]

Can someone give a non biased argument as to why clausen looks more like a bust than Bradford? I have talked to a couple of scouts and neither really sell me on one over the other. To me it just seems like one is hyped over the other. I really really want an upgrade at QB but just seems obvious to me we have to go LT. To the poster regarding Pashos as a stop gap LT, pretty sure he plays on the right side of the line.

Well the things that concern me are:

A) There seems to be some talk about his character and leadership. Some people view him as a little ****y and not a team guy. I don't pretend to know what is behind it but it seems to be enough of a legit concern with scouts that Clausen had to address it in interviews. Bradford seems to be the safer character guy.

In my personal opinion, I don't like his throwing motion. He seems to have an exaggerated body motion as he torques his shoulder to throw that IMO could be a problem if he cant plant his feet well under pressure. It seems like he's forcing the ball out. I just like the way the ball comes out of Bradford's hand better. Just more natural and seemingly with no effort.

[Hail Gibbs]

I have heard indirectly that they don't love Clausen. Not certain, but that is the rumblings I have heard.

My fingers are crossed that this is the case. As for Bradford, I am starting to think he won't be there @4.

[War Paint]

To me this year is too much like 1994.

Heath Shuler and Trent Dilfer. Sam Bradford vs. Jimmy Clausen.

Didn't sound like a John Elway vs. Dan Marino choice in 1994 and doesn't this year either.

The safest course at the most critical position is to STAY AWAY from drafting a guy at the top of the board IF there are any real questions about him.

And there are questions about both of them.

While this could be true, I'm tired of drafting guys like Campbell and Ramsey in the late first round. It seems we get stuck with QBs that aren't elite, but just mediocre enough to give you false hope, so you waste a few years on them. I want us to take the chance on a potential elite QB this year. We may not have this opportunity again. Yeah, it's possible that Clausen and Bradford don't pan out, but it's also possible they can become elite franchise QBs.

If we don't draft one of them, I'm afraid we'd be doing the Ramsey and Campbell thing over again, by drafting a QB that has some talent, but not enough to become an elite QB.

[War Paint]

I'm not too familiar with the details of Bradford and Clausen, but I know Clausen has shown that he can be clutch, like leading his team down the field in the last two minutes to comeback and win the game. That is a quality we do not have on the Redskins right now.

[NavyDave]

I'm afraid we'd be doing the Ramsey and Campbell thing over again..

You mean drafting a young rugged strong armed QB who takes a beating behind a horribly weak O line in a pathetic offensive system (s)???

[Mad Mike]

while this could be true, i'm tired of drafting guys like campbell and ramsey in the late first round. It seems we get stuck with qbs that aren't elite, but just mediocre enough to give you false hope, so you waste a few years on them. I want us to take the chance on a potential elite qb this year. We may not have this opportunity again. Yeah, it's possible that clausen and bradford don't pan out, but it's also possible they can become elite franchise qbs.

If we don't draft one of them, i'm afraid we'd be doing the ramsey and campbell thing over again, by drafting a qb that has some talent, but not enough to become an elite qb.

exactly.

[icbmayday]

We are going to draft Okung hopefully

[No Excuses]

We had Chris Samuels and Jon Jansen for the longest time and how did that go for this franchise? They spent their whole careers blocking for garbage. If you have a chance for a franchise QB, especially the #1 rated guy, you NEVER pass it for a freaking lineman.

[MrJL]

So if Bradford goes to the Rams, and Okung to the Lions who do we take?

I imagine we have to trade down.

[MrJL]

While this could be true, I'm tired of drafting guys like Campbell and Ramsey in the late first round. It seems we get stuck with QBs that aren't elite, but just mediocre enough to give you false hope, so you waste a few years on them. I want us to take the chance on a potential elite QB this year. We may not have this opportunity again. Yeah, it's possible that Clausen and Bradford don't pan out, but it's also possible they can become elite franchise QBs.

If we don't draft one of them, I'm afraid we'd be doing the Ramsey and Campbell thing over again, by drafting a QB that has some talent, but not enough to become an elite QB.

And I want the exact opposite. I want them to minimize the risk as much as possible. I think we're far more likely to draft a bust than the next superstar QB.

[Weganator]

I am starting to notice a major divide in ES: those people who think jimmy clausen will be a franchise qb, and those who are wrong....

[MrJL]

I am starting to notice a major divide in ES: those people who think jimmy clausen will be a franchise qb, and those who are wrong....

those are the same people:pfft:

[War Paint]

I guess it really boils down to Campbell supporters wanting Oline with our #4 vs. those who know what is best for the Skins wanting a QB at#4:pfft:

[War Paint]

And I want the exact opposite. I want them to minimize the risk as much as possible. I think we're far more likely to draft a bust than the next superstar QB.

I really wish I could remember where I heard the stat, but it said that statistically teams who draft a QB in the first and a lineman in the second have better success than a team that drafts a lineman in the first and a qb in the second.

[War Paint]

Okay, I don't think this is where I heard the stat, but it's another source that supports what I've heard.

http://www.csnwashington.com/02/11/10/Redskins-Draft-QB-Or-O-Lineman-At-Number/landing_redskins.html?blockID=179245&feedID=272

From 2004 through 2009, 17 quarterbacks were taken in the first round. Of a possible combined 1,024 starts, the players in this group actually have started 638, or 62 percent.

In that same period of time, 27 offensive linemen were taken in the first round, and they have started 1,093 games out of a possible 1,328. That comes out to 82 percent.

Comparing first-round quarterbacks to first-round linemen, then, it would appear that if the goal is to avoid a bust, taking a lineman first is the way to go.

But let’s take a look at selections in the second round. The 29 linemen selected have started 1,077 of a possible 1,648 games, or 65 percent.

The eight second-round quarterbacks have started 49 out of 352 games. That’s a paltry 14 percent. Just looking at that number, one would have to say that the potential for a second-round quarterback being a bust is alarmingly high.

So you can see, your chance is better going QB in the first and Lineman second than vice versa.