Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room > NFL Draft Central


79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

NFL Draft Central


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-20-2010, 02:59 PM   #1
Impact Rookie
 
PennSkinsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Age: 43
Posts: 752
79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

Quote:
QB Sam Bradford continues to dominate the mock drafts as the Washington Redskins 4th pick in the Draft. 48% of the 79 most updated mocks project Bradford to the Redskins. What is even more surprising is the fact QB Jimmy Clausen is second behind Bradford with 29%. That means, a total of 77% of the mocks are projecting the Redskins to go Quarterback. Really?
__________________
DC Pro Sports Report - Home of the Internet's Largest NFL Mock Draft Database. Best Redskins Redskins discussion, theWarpath.net

PennSkinsFan is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 01-20-2010, 10:13 PM   #2
Special Teams
 
Texanskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Skins fan in the Dallas area
Posts: 187
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

This means we are dumb if we go along with this...or we could be baiting teams to pull the trigger on a trade so we can trade down....either way....OFFENSIVE LINE PLEASE
__________________
We are finally looking like a respectable opponent.....Lets keep it going!!!
Texanskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2010, 10:32 PM   #3
Thank You, Sean.
 
Gmanc711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Age: 28
Posts: 7,497
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

I will say this at this point... with Shannahan and Bruce Allen running the show, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt with whatever they attempt to do. If that means drafting smaller linemen later to run the zone blocking and drafing a QB in the first and not a LT, then, while I would rather have a linemen, I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt..
__________________
#21
Gmanc711 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2010, 10:50 PM   #4
Impact Rookie
 
tootergray34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 681
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

i'm in the anybody but campbell club...
tootergray34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 10:06 AM   #5
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,427
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

More proof of how meaningless mocks are
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 10:14 AM   #6
Registered User
 
BigHairedAristocrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,917
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

I think its safe to say that all the QBs in the draft will still be on the board when we draft at 4... which means we should have several teams calling us to trade down.

(of course, these same teams could not trust us to NOT take the QB they want and just trade with Tampta Bay)
BigHairedAristocrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 10:15 AM   #7
Karma Chameleon (I come and go)
 
jdlea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Annapolis, MD
Age: 29
Posts: 3,087
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gmanc711 View Post
I will say this at this point... with Shannahan and Bruce Allen running the show, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt with whatever they attempt to do. If that means drafting smaller linemen later to run the zone blocking and drafing a QB in the first and not a LT, then, while I would rather have a linemen, I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt..
I agree with this. Shanahan can probably find lineman later in the draft who fits what he wants to do, so I'm not going to lose my mind if we don't take a LT at #4. Personally, I'd prefer to see McClain or Berry (he'll probably be gone) at that spot, but I'm going to let Shanahan do what he wants without being too critical.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack
Albert Connell is perhaps the worst Redskin I ever had the misfortune of meeting. He's the kind of guy that makes media people covering their favorite team growing up no longer like that team
jdlea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 11:08 AM   #8
Impact Rookie
 
davy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: England
Posts: 691
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk View Post
More proof of how meaningless mocks are
Are you suggesting that Allen and Shanahan have some other way of deciding who to draft?
__________________
“Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to.”
davy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 11:10 AM   #9
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,427
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

Quote:
Originally Posted by davy View Post
Are you suggesting that Allen and Shanahan have some other way of deciding who to draft?
dart boards
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 11:25 AM   #10
Impact Rookie
 
davy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: England
Posts: 691
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk View Post
dart boards
I hope JC isn't throwing the darts.


My bad.
__________________
“Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to.”
davy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 11:31 AM   #11
The Starter
 
Redskin Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 1,479
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texanskin View Post
This means we are dumb if we go along with this...or we could be baiting teams to pull the trigger on a trade so we can trade down....either way....OFFENSIVE LINE PLEASE
Trading down is great possibility

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4843237
__________________
WIN, LOSE OR DRAW I'M A DIE-HARD REDSKIN FAN!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotus View Post
First they ban winning...now this?
Redskin Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 11:34 AM   #12
Playmaker
 
over the mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: baltimore
Posts: 3,180
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

watching bradford's highlight reels, almost all of the plays he is in shotgun. the only time i saw him under center was for handoffs or play action passes.

i'd prefer clausen over bradford but like whats been said in here; im giving shanahan, allen and the DS the beneift of the doubt that they have the most information and best idea of what is best for this team. man, that is so refreshing as a skins fan.
over the mountain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 02:54 PM   #13
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 28
Posts: 14,421
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texanskin View Post
This means we are dumb if we go along with this...or we could be baiting teams to pull the trigger on a trade so we can trade down....either way....OFFENSIVE LINE PLEASE
Similar to what people said in Atlanta when the Falcons chose Ryan over Glen Dorsey. Ryan missed virtually 3 games this year and the thanks to him the Falcons were still able to finish 9-7 inlcuding a 3 game win streak to close out the year. If they had Ryan for 16 games they would easily have made the playoffs.

If you find a QB that you know can be a star you draft him. Vinny didn't take lineman period (save Rinehart) and that was our problem. Not hesitating to draft two guys at positions like LB, WR, S, and CB yet never willing to draft more then one O-Lineman. Give the front office the beniefit of the doubt, we don't need to select an O-Lineman with the first pick to fix our O-Line.

Also remember this. The Chiefs did the "smart" thing in 2008. Drafting a D-Lineman (Dorsey) and a LT in Albert, yet they have won 6 games in the last two years (with ironically one of those victories coming against us). The Falcons have won 20 games since drafting Ryan. Again the point being if you see a QB that you know you can develop into a franchise guy you take him.
__________________
"Hey baby, wake up from your a sleep." -Zlad

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 03:53 PM   #14
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,993
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtbag359 View Post
Similar to what people said in Atlanta when the Falcons chose Ryan over Glen Dorsey. Ryan missed virtually 3 games this year and the thanks to him the Falcons were still able to finish 9-7 inlcuding a 3 game win streak to close out the year. If they had Ryan for 16 games they would easily have made the playoffs.

If you find a QB that you know can be a star you draft him. Vinny didn't take lineman period (save Rinehart) and that was our problem. Not hesitating to draft two guys at positions like LB, WR, S, and CB yet never willing to draft more then one O-Lineman. Give the front office the beniefit of the doubt, we don't need to select an O-Lineman with the first pick to fix our O-Line.

Also remember this. The Chiefs did the "smart" thing in 2008. Drafting a D-Lineman (Dorsey) and a LT in Albert, yet they have won 6 games in the last two years (with ironically one of those victories coming against us). The Falcons have won 20 games since drafting Ryan. Again the point being if you see a QB that you know you can develop into a franchise guy you take him.
I can't stress enough that Atlanta also found a taker to trade up and take Sam Baker in the same draft. They also identified the receiving corps as a team strength under Bobby Petrino, but decided that they needed to rebuild the OL and the offensive backfield in order to be a competitive team.

One of the big reasons that they were able to rebuild so fast is because they were able to find a high second round pick for DeAngelo Hall in a trade, and consequently, they had the ammo to get up into position for Baker when Vinny came calling.

The obvious is that, even with this years (somewhat inevitable) setback, Atlanta did rebuilding the right way. They also got quite lucky. They evaluated Ryan properly, they didn't shoot their load to move up and get him, and they didn't overvalue a defensive lineman simply because of his position on the field. Ryan was the right guy for them, and there was no reason (at least in hindsight) for them to pass on that pick. They had the necessary team infrastructure to make it work from day one IF Ryan had the goods, which it appears he does.

Let's not confuse drafting a D-Lineman high vs. drafting an O-Lineman high though. Drafting a D-Lineman high seems to be a very bad historical proposition for a rebuilding team, worse than drafting a quarterback high. The reasons are similar. Like a quarterback, all but the best defensive lineman in the game are dependent on their defensive teammates for opportunities. This is not true of a great corner, a game-changing safety, or a standout linebacker. All of those pieces are excellent places to start your defense. Whereas a game changing pass rusher may be the most valuable piece, it is useless on a defense that offers nothing outside of that one pass rusher (see: Elvis Dumerville's 2008 season).

Drafting an offensive lineman high is never a bad call, if the pick itself plays up to the value spent on the pick. Reaching is still reaching, of course. Robert Gallery should not have been drafted with the No. 2 overall pick. The Raiders would have been much better off with Philip Rivers or Ben Roethlisberger, even though Gallery has started more games than Rivers, and his gross career value is probably similar to Roethlisbergers, he's far, far more replaceable than either of those guys, and thusly, was not as good of a draft pick.

If Russell Okung is there, the Redskins can't pass on him. If he's not there, they can go in a whole bunch of directions, including defense and offensive skill positions, quarterback, and next best offensive lineman. Pretty much the only place(s) they can't afford to go is defensive line (and tight end), and if by some miracle Suh is there at No. 4, you'd have to at least consider it (before not drafting him).
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2010, 04:00 PM   #15
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,993
Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

And then the obvious disclaimer: even if you don't believe that Jason Campbell has much of a future in Washington, there are still 9 (8, if both TEs are counted) positions on the offense where we are receiving less per-play production than quarterback. And of the 8, only Antwaan Randle El is really even providing close to the level of expected production, and I don't believe he's all that irreplaceable in the greater sense. [The stats don't say "Randle El shouldn't be cut" but they do say that "everyone else that isn't Randle El probably should be"]

Not all of those positions can be addressed in one draft, and not all those positions would be practical targets with the 4th overall pick. The point is: that's a whole lot of non-quarterback related suck, and to say that there's no one we can find at No. 4 overall except Okung that would fix the problem seems like kind of a defeatist attitude. There's got to be a WR, RB, or OL not named Russell Okung who is worthy of the 4th overall pick. I would think.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.30665 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25