Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=mlmdub130;648216]throwing the ball under 15 yards isn't campbell it's the wco, thats just they way it is run, thats one of the main reasons i hate it and hope we get rid of it, it's just shitty screens and making plays in space, it's not a big downfield threat[/quote]

You need a QB who can run the west coast offense to though

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

I'm trying real hard to understand the, "We need a quarterback in the first couple of rounds" logic. I'm not trying to insult those of you who believe we should draft a QB, I'm just saying that I don't understand it. Campbell falls right in the middle of almost all NFL QBs statistically. If you think anyone else would have done better this year you're taking crazy pills. I'd like to have a top 5 QB too, but we have no idea what we're going to end up with. Imagine spending the next 3 years trying to groom a JaMarcus Russell. JC may not be the long term answer but he can certainly help get the Redskins through the rebuilding phase. Why don't we replace the players who suck instead of replacing the players who are average? Can anyone say, with a straight face, that we need to replace the QB before we address several line positions, at least one RB or a secondary that got us a whopping 10 interceptions so far this year? You have to take the best player in any of those three areas first. Shouldn't the horrible areas of the team be addressed before the average areas are??

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=44Deezel;648193] BUT taking a shot at QB with the first pick isn't ridiculous. The Chargers drafted Philip Rivers while Drew Brees was their QB.[/quote]

They also weren't starting 2nd and 3rd string offensive lineman and they already had a young premier running back in LT. They probably could afford to gamble on a QB.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SKINS73;648231]I'm trying real hard to understand the, "We need a quarterback in the first couple of rounds" logic. I'm not trying to insult those of you who believe we should draft a QB, I'm just saying that I don't understand it. Campbell falls right in the middle of almost all NFL QBs statistically. If you think anyone else would have done better this year you're taking crazy pills. I'd like to have a top 5 QB too, but we have no idea what we're going to end up with. Imagine spending the next 3 years trying to groom a JaMarcus Russell. JC may not be the long term answer but he can certainly help get the Redskins through the rebuilding phase. Why don't we replace the players who suck instead of replacing the players who are average? Can anyone say, with a straight face, that we need to replace the QB before we address several line positions, at least one RB or a secondary that got us a whopping 10 interceptions so far this year? You have to take the best player in any of those three areas first. Shouldn't the horrible areas of the team be addressed before the average areas are??[/quote]

If we don't think Campbell is the long term answer why not see what you can get for him now and rebuild with the QB of the future? I mean why not go through the rebuilding phase with the QB we want to rebuild with?

We shouldn't draft a offensive lineman in the first round just to say we drafted one. At at #5 if Okung isn't the guy we take then that's basically what we're doing.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

^ I actually think that with an average line and an average supporting cast Campbell might be more productive. I can't say for sure, but he deserves a chance to compete at the very least. If Okung is gone then I wouldn't mind picking up Spiller or Berry, not a QB.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SKINS73;648248]^ I actually think that with an average line and an average supporting cast Campbell might be more productive. I can't say for sure, but he deserves a chance to compete at the very least. If Okung is gone then I wouldn't mind picking up Spiller or Berry, not a QB.[/quote]

Berry? Whom do you speak?

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SKINS73;648231]I'm trying real hard to understand the, "We need a quarterback in the first couple of rounds" logic. I'm not trying to insult those of you who believe we should draft a QB, I'm just saying that I don't understand it. Campbell falls right in the middle of almost all NFL QBs statistically. If you think anyone else would have done better this year you're taking crazy pills. I'd like to have a top 5 QB too, but we have no idea what we're going to end up with. Imagine spending the next 3 years trying to groom a JaMarcus Russell. JC may not be the long term answer but he can certainly help get the Redskins through the rebuilding phase. Why don't we replace the players who suck instead of replacing the players who are average? Can anyone say, with a straight face, that we need to replace the QB before we address several line positions, at least one RB or a secondary that got us a whopping 10 interceptions so far this year? You have to take the best player in any of those three areas first. Shouldn't the horrible areas of the team be addressed before the average areas are??[/quote]


I can answer your question with one simple word, and that word is depth. Collins might hang it up or should, and Brennan is a bust. Give me a Pike, Stull, Lefevour, Canfield, Sheehan, or Todd over Brennan. Shoot I would want Joey Elliot of Purdue or even a Mike Kafka from Northwestern before Brennan. Plus JC might split dude. You are right, JC is what ranked 15 or something in passing and a lot of teams have shitty QBs like Cleveland or Oakland. JC might be a good backup for other teams or "insurance" for others still. Either way you need a QB, maybe even two if Collins bolts.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SKINS73;648248]^ I actually think that with an average line and an average supporting cast Campbell might be more productive. I can't say for sure, but he deserves a chance to compete at the very least. If Okung is gone then I wouldn't mind picking up Spiller or Berry, not a QB.[/quote]

But let's suppose Bruce Allen came out and said "Jason Campbell is not the long-term answer for us" Would you rather they just let him go now and start fresh with someone else asap or let him hang around for another year even though he's not in the long term plans.

Spiller would be very exciting (though I think I slightly, very, slightly prefer Best). Still, I'd be kind of curious to see what Alridge can bring to the table given the opportunity. And combine that with drafting Dwyer-we'd have to trade into the 2nd probably-I would like that

Berry is a total stud...but I don't want to draft anymore DBs right now. Other than maybe LB, I'd rather not draft any defensive players.

I think too much of a fuss is being made about Bradford's shoulder injury. You'd think he had his arm amputated the way some talk about it

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

Why risk taking Bradford who has had his shoulder messed up twice in the same season? If he takes a hit and his shoulder pops again you just wasted another #1 draft pick on a kid that will never produce for you. Too much QB talent available in 2010 just to go for the overhyped Big 4 trap.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;648255]But let's suppose Bruce Allen came out and said "Jason Campbell is not the long-term answer for us" Would you rather they just let him go now and start fresh with someone else asap or let him hang around for another year even though he's not in the long term plans.

[/quote]

Exactly and keep in mind having a rookie QB doesn't mean your throwing in the towel for the season. Even the Jets are going to the playoffs with Mark Sanchez at the helm. And lets not forget the Ravens and the Falcons both making the playoffs with rookie QB's in 08.

Plus the most telling stat is probably what Shannahan was able to do with Cutler in his rookie year with an 88 rating in the 5 games he started his rookie year.

I fear that even if we make the playoffs with JC we won't be able to even make it to the NFC championship let alone win the Super Bowl. Keep in mind this is a team that wants to win a Super Bowl, not simply make the playoffs. I know it's been beaten to death but I don't want to settle for mediocrity. If we're going to be a championship contender year in and year out we're going to need a true franchise QB. The kind of guy that makes you feel like the Saints, Colts, Steelers, and Patriots feel every week they go into a game. All thats left is to have our competent front office decide if we can develop that guy into the player we need him to be.

Also as Smoot has said before Drew Brees had similar shoulder problems going into [I]free agency[/I]

[quote=GusFrerotte;648260]Why risk taking Bradford who has had his shoulder messed up twice in the same season? If he takes a hit and his shoulder pops again you just wasted another #1 draft pick on a kid that will never produce for you. Too much QB talent available in 2010 just to go for the overhyped Big 4 trap.[/quote]

Again Drew Brees had similar shoulder problems going into [I]free agency. [/I]

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

Not sure Brees had them before the draft. He had them before free agency

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;648267]Not sure Brees had them before the draft. He had them before free agency[/quote]

Thats it, alright my bad. Still the point is the same, guy with a questionable shoulder has turned into possibly the best QB in the league.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;648254]I can answer your question with one simple word, and that word is depth. Collins might hang it up or should, and Brennan is a bust. Give me a Pike, Stull, Lefevour, Canfield, Sheehan, or Todd over Brennan. Shoot I would want Joey Elliot of Purdue or even a Mike Kafka from Northwestern before Brennan. Plus JC might split dude. You are right, JC is what ranked 15 or something in passing and a lot of teams have shitty QBs like Cleveland or Oakland. JC might be a good backup for other teams or "insurance" for others still. Either way you need a QB, maybe even two if Collins bolts.[/quote]

I agree that we need depth, which is why we can't afford to lose Campbell. Imagine Campbell gone, Collins retires and we have a rookie QB. We would need to spend a draft pick and maybe obtain a QB through FA and waste a lot of resources on a position that wasn't our Achilles Heal this past season.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[quote=SmootSmack;648255][B]But let's suppose Bruce Allen came out and said "Jason Campbell is not the long-term answer for us"[/B] Would you rather they just let him go now and start fresh with someone else asap or let him hang around for another year even though he's not in the long term plans.

Spiller would be very exciting (though I think I slightly, very, slightly prefer Best). Still, I'd be kind of curious to see what Alridge can bring to the table given the opportunity. And combine that with drafting Dwyer-we'd have to trade into the 2nd probably-I would like that

Berry is a total stud...but I don't want to draft anymore DBs right now. Other than maybe LB, I'd rather not draft any defensive players.

I think too much of a fuss is being made about Bradford's shoulder injury. You'd think he had his arm amputated the way some talk about it[/quote]Well, outside of the fact that we'd have another Vinny on our hands, then yes, you'd have to move him one way or another.

Re: Sam Bradford remains projected pick to Redskins
 

[IMG]http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o99/milrenkb/Skinslooking.jpg[/IMG]