79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[B][url=http://www.dcprosportsreport.com/articles/washington-redskins/79-mock-drafts-sam-bradford-still-redskins-projected-choice.html]79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice[/url][/B]

[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?[/QUOTE]

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

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..

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

i'm in the anybody but campbell club...

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

More proof of how meaningless mocks are

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)

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Gmanc711;657124]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..[/quote]

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.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Mattyk;657208]More proof of how meaningless mocks are[/quote]

Are you suggesting that Allen and Shanahan have some other way of deciding who to draft?

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=davy;657227]Are you suggesting that Allen and Shanahan have some other way of deciding who to draft?[/quote]

dart boards

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Mattyk;657229]dart boards[/quote]

I hope JC isn't throwing the darts. :)


My bad. :spank:

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Texanskin;657120]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[/quote]

Trading down is great possibility

[URL="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4843237"]http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4843237[/URL]

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.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Texanskin;657120]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[/quote]

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.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;657294]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.[/quote]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).

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.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

This is a *one-star thread if I ever saw one!

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=GTripp0012;657330]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: [B]that's a whole lot of non-quarterback related suck[/B], 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.[/quote]

How can you say that? There is nothing wrong with our roster, which is playoff-ready right now. Vinny said so.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

Mock drafts are only useful in fantasy football otherwise it's all speculation. How can any of these so-call "experts" say with any degree of certainty that we'll draft a QB with the no. 4 pick (these were the same idiots that said we were going to pick Sanchez last year) when Shannahan probably doesn't even know who they'll pick? He's not even fully staffed yet and I'd imagine they'll do their due diligence and evaluate our roster and then see what's available through FA.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

I finally saw a mock draft that didint have us taking Okung or a QB, it had us taking the Trent Williams instead, but I thought I had read he wouldn't fit the Shanahan typical O LINE style

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;657294]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.[/quote]

comparing our obvious O line needs to a team that drafted glen dorsey is apple and oranges....this entire year we SAW what the need is for our team. Tony romo (who is elusive) was killed without line protection!!! If our O line was like the jets or ravens I'm ok with QB pick...matt ryan had a GOOD LINE. Any rookie behind a bad line = david carr, alex smith...name a rookie who blossumed behind a poor line...NONE

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

Only Aaron Rogers comes to mind...

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;657426]Only Aaron Rogers comes to mind...[/quote]

Rogers also sat a few years before being handed the reins so he was not really a rookie.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Texanskin;657414]comparing our obvious O line needs to a team that drafted glen dorsey is apple and oranges....this entire year we SAW what the need is for our team. Tony romo (who is elusive) was killed without line protection!!! If our O line was like the jets or ravens I'm ok with QB pick[B]...matt ryan had a GOOD LINE[/B]. Any rookie behind a bad line = david carr, alex smith...name a rookie who blossumed behind a poor line...NONE[/quote]

Thats the thing though going into 2008 the Falcons line was in worse shape then the Skins were this year. In 2008 their starters were coming off a year were they had given up [I]edit: 47 sacks[/I] (the skins gave up 46 in 2009). The only real new addition was Sam Baker who missed a lot of time due to injury (8 games played 5 starts).

Now I'm not saying we just go into next year with the same starters . Far from it, but what I do want is to draft a QB with the 4th pick if the front office thinks that Clausen or Bradford can be a star. The right QB can make all the difference and in reality gives us the best chance to compete for a championship on a regular basis. Now if they think that neither of those guys can be a star then please, by all means, draft Okung or Davis. You won't hear me complaining at all.

However my point being that there have many times when fans for other franchises have called for the safe picks over the QB's. Sometimes they were right (asking the Raiders to draft Calvin Johnson over JaMarcus Russell) and other times they were wrong (asking the Falcons to draft Glen Dorsey over Matt Ryan). For the first time in a long time, I'm truly comfortable with letting the football people make the decisions.

[B]Anyway heres a scouting report on the Falcons O-Line going into 2008:[/B]
[url=http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2008/08/29/2008-offensive-line-breakdowns-the-bunk/]2008 Offensive Line Breakdowns: The Bunk -- NFL FanHouse[/url]
The Atlanta Falcons: Welcome to hell on earth Matt Ryan. Ever wonder why Joey Harrington's career never got a fair shake? Everywhere he went, he had no time to throw. And Matt Ryan, you are about to find out exactly how it feels. Right tackle Todd Weiner underwent major knee surgery and will likely not play. First-rounder, Sam Baker will start at left tackle, but unless he can block five guys simultaneously, stick a fork in this offense. Center Todd McClure and right guard Kynan Forney are veterans, but the rest of the line is totally up in the air and very inexperienced.
2007 Sacks Allowed: 47

2007 Yards Per Carry: 3.9
------------------------------------------------
Again they went into that season with virtually the same O-Line they had in 2007. Sam Baker was the only real addition. It's also worth noting that in 2008 the line gave up only 17 sacks.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=LandrySlice;657411]I finally saw a mock draft that didint have us taking Okung or a QB, [B]it had us taking the Trent Williams instead[/B], but I thought I had read he wouldn't fit the Shanahan typical O LINE style[/quote]

I've found it interesting that there is actually some question whether TW can even play LT in the NFL. I've read that he will go back to RT where he will have a good career. Some reports are pretty adamant about it. #4 would be pretty high for TW IMO.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

If we don't trade down, I wouldn't mind seeing something like this depending on availability:

#1 Russell Okung LT
#2a Trent Williams LT/RT (If available)
#2b Michael Johnson OG (Should fit in well in zone blocking)
#4a Dan LeFevour QB (If available) or..
#4b Ryan Mathews RB
#5 #7 Best available (Hopefully a C, FS or OLB)

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=53Fan;657528]If we don't trade down, I wouldn't mind seeing something like this depending on availability:

#1 Russell Okung LT
#2a Trent Williams LT/RT (If available)
#2b Michael Johnson OG (Should fit in well in zone blocking)
#4a Dan LeFevour QB (If available) or..
#4b Ryan Mathews RB
#5 #7 Best available (Hopefully a C, FS or OLB)[/quote]

I like this only thing I don't believe that Mathews will be there beyond the third round.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

I gave Zorn the benefit of the doubt and it didn't get the Redskins squat.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=JLee9718;657602]I gave Zorn the benefit of the doubt and it didn't get the Redskins squat.[/quote]

That was Zorn working with Vinny Cerrato. If anyone can succeed in that situation then I would sure like to see it.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=JLee9718;657602]I gave Zorn the benefit of the doubt and it didn't get the Redskins squat.[/quote]

I'm willing, for now, to give the new regime a pass when it comes to offense. I'm less willing to give passes when it comes to defense.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

All I know is that if the Skins cannot put up a decent fight next year I will be pissed.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

All right, I know I put this in another thread but this is the "Sam Bradford" thread so I thought I would bring it here also so all could see. Especially if they are interested in him. The writer did an evaluation then was looking at another player and found that Sam impressed him in the video he was reviewing so he did a second review on Sam. Look at the "Bottom Line- Take 2".

[url=http://www.thehuddlereport.com/huddlenotes/?p=129]Sam Bradford QB Oklahoma | HUDDLE NOTES[/url]

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=SBXVII;657619]All right, I know I put this in another thread but this is the "Sam Bradford" thread so I thought I would bring it here also so all could see. Especially if they are interested in him. The writer did an evaluation then was looking at another player and found that Sam impressed him in the video he was reviewing so he did a second review on Sam. Look at the "Bottom Line- Take 2".

[URL="http://www.thehuddlereport.com/huddlenotes/?p=129"]Sam Bradford QB Oklahoma | HUDDLE NOTES[/URL][/quote]

Yeah thanks for linking that. I was lukewarm to the idea of Bradford, but after I read that I went and watched all the tape I could find.

He has a very quick release and is crazy accurate. There just seems to be something about him that looks like he knows something most QB's don't. So if we do pick him that means the decision makers see the same stuff and much more.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Texanskin;657414]comparing our obvious O line needs to a team that drafted glen dorsey is apple and oranges....this entire year we SAW what the need is for our team. Tony romo (who is elusive) was killed without line protection!!! If our O line was like the jets or ravens I'm ok with QB pick...matt ryan had a GOOD LINE. Any rookie behind a bad line = david carr, alex smith...name a rookie who blossumed behind a poor line...NONE[/quote]

This is a very good point.

Our offensive line play was down-right embarrassing last year. Peyton Manning wouldn't produce like he does if he played behind our line.

Sanchez (Bradford or any rookie QB they bring in as an alternative to JC) would or will be a disaster without a major overhaul of the offensive line.

I believe JC can and will be a great quarterback in the NFL. Protect him with a running game and pass protection and then judge him.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=DIE-NASTY;657641]This is a very good point.

Our offensive line play was down-right embarrassing last year. Peyton Manning wouldn't produce like he does if he played behind our line.

Sanchez (Bradford or any rookie QB they bring in as an alternative to JC) would or will be a disaster without a major overhaul of the offensive line.

I believe JC can and will be a great quarterback in the NFL. Protect him with a running game and pass protection and then judge him.[/quote]

Well then in that case you're going to get your wish. JC is going to probably play for most of next year with a rebuilt O-Line and a top 15 running game, but by the same token the chances that we're going to take a QB with our first pick seems pretty high as well.

It is very likely, now that we have a competent front office and coaching staff, that we will not be picking in the top 10 for a while. If the front office sees a QB up here at 4 that can be a franchise guy we have to take him. If not then we select an Offensive Lineman. However picking O-Line just to pick O-line is the same type of one player away thinking that Vinny use to frequently employ.

Still we need a long term plan and passing up on what is seen as a franchise QB will most likely cost us picks in the future to trade up (namely a second rounder) for a decent QB prospect. Also keep in mind that QB's face longer learning curves then tackles.

Again all of this is moot if the front office doesn't like the QB's available at 4 but there seems to be a growing sentiment that if we don't pick an O-Lineman first then we're not addressing the O-Line at all.

Anyway we'll see come April.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

have to go QB...I think the majority...including me...is sick of JC's indecisiveness and lack of productivity, even in years where we had a decent line he still wasn't that impressive.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;657652]Well then in that case you're going to get your wish. JC is going to probably play for most of next year with a rebuilt O-Line and a top 15 running game, but by the same token the chances that we're going to take a QB with our first pick seems pretty high as well.

It is very likely, now that we have a competent front office and coaching staff, that we will not be picking in the top 10 for a while. If the front office sees a QB up here at 4 that can be a franchise guy we have to take him. If not then we select an Offensive Lineman. However picking O-Line just to pick O-line is the same type of one player away thinking that Vinny use to frequently employ.

Still we need a long term plan and passing up on what is seen as a franchise QB will most likely cost us picks in the future to trade up (namely a second rounder) for a decent QB prospect. Also keep in mind that QB's face longer learning curves then tackles.

Again all of this is moot if the front office doesn't like the QB's available at 4 [B]but there seems to be a growing sentiment that if we don't pick an O-Lineman first then we're not addressing the O-Line at all.[/B]

Anyway we'll see come April.[/quote]

I'm not as sure of that being the case as people just not being sold on Clausen or Bradford being all that great. Personally I like Bradford, but I would like to see how he does at the combine and see whether Dr. Andrews gives him a thumbs up after checking him out. I think the problem right now is they're both "risky" at this point. I don't think there's as much risk in Okung. If either of the QB's don't become quality starters, I wouldn't be shocked, but I would be very surprised if Okung doesn't turn out to be very good for a very long time. Shanny seems to have a good eye for QB's and knows how to bring out the best in them. I think he could bring out the best in JC (He does seem to like strong arms) and a good o-line would be a big part of that. It would also be a big part of helping the running game. Now having said that, if he thinks Bradford or Clausen are elite and JC will never approach what they have to offer, go for it. Try to get at least one starter for the o-line in the second, and sign some FA's. But we are going to need to draft some quality o-linemen sometime and the best are in the first round. We could fill a spot in the 2nd, but let's be honest, we need more than one and the further down you go, the less chance you have of getting a quality starter. There's always a diamond in the rough...but there are a lot of rocks there too. It doesn't always end in a "feel good story". Our line has sucked because we haven't drafted an o-lineman in the first or second round in 10 years.

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

I too believe OL is a major issue and throughout the season finally came to grips with the fact we need to upgrade the OL position. But I still can't help thinking that the best of the best QB's usually get drafted pretty high up in the first round. You might get lucky and find a diamond in the rough but drafting someone who is supposed to be a Franchise player and actually live up to it? their drafted pretty high.

Shanahan's type of OL I keep hearing is usually not the top big names on the draft board but more like the smaller faster OL for his system which to me means OL other teams may not be targeting. So the OL we are looking at might be available in later rounds. But if we want a Frachise QB, the sure bets won't usually be available in round 2 or after. Don't get me wrong diamond in the roughs can be found. But most of the QB's picked up beyond the 1st round are more of a crap shoot.

Next year I am hedging my bets that Shanahan will have the team ending with a better record which means if we are thinking of holding out for next yr for a QB (in case JC doesn't work out) most likely it will be harder to get the Franchise QB we want at mid first round or beyond.

How about if we are looking at Shanahan and his staff and being told to stop nit picking Shanahan's decisions on coaching staff, cause he must have put major thought into the decision then we need to do the same with whatever he decides to do with the #4 pick. :)

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

Here's a list of QB's taken in the first round from 1990 to 2002:

Andre Ware [B]#7[/B] ........................Peyton Manning #1
Jeff George #1 ........................Ryan Leaf [B]#2[/B]
Dan McGwire #16 ....................Tim Couch [B]#1[/B]
Todd Marinovich #24 ................Donovan McNabb #2
David Klinger [B]#6[/B] ......................Akili Smith [B]#3[/B]
Tommy Maddox #25 .................Cade McNown #12
Drew Bledsoe #1 .....................Daunte Culpepper #11
Rick Mirer [B]#2 [/B]..........................Chad Pennington #18
Heath Shuler [B]#3[/B] ......................Michael Vick [B]#1[/B]
Trent Dilfer [B]#6[/B] ........................David Carr[B] #1[/B]
Steve McNair #3 .....................Joey Harrington[B] #3[/B]
Kerry Collins [B]#5[/B] .......................Patrick Ramsey # 32
Jim Drunkenmiller #26

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

Here is a list of starting QB's and where they were drafted
1.NO Drew Brees-2nd
2.IND Peyton Manning-1st
3.NE Tom Brady-6th
4.PIT Ben Rothlisberger-1st
5.SD Phillip Rivers-1st
6.ARZ Kurt Warner-undrafted
7.CHI Jay Cutler-1st
8.CIN Carson Palmer-1st
9.NYG Eli Manning-1st
10.SEA Matt Hasselback-6th
11.DAL Tony Romo-undrafted
12.PHI Donovan NcNabb-1st
13.SL Marc Bulger-6th
14.GB Aaron Rogers-1st
15.KC Matt Cassel-7th
16.ATL Matt Ryan-1st
17.CLE Derek Anderson-6th
18.BAL Joe Flacco-1st
19.TEN Kerry Collins-1st
20.HOU Matt Scaub-3rd
21.JAX David Garrard-4th
22.MIA Chad Pennington-1st
23.BUF Trent Edwards-3rd
24.WAS Jason Campbell-1st
25.SF Shaun Hill- undrafted , Alex Smith-1st
26.DET Matthew Stafford-1st
27.CAR Jake Delhomme-undrafted
28.OAK Jamarcus Russell-1st
29.DEN Kyle Orton-4th
30.MIN Bret Farvre-2nd
31.TB Josh Freeman-1st
32.NYJ Mark Sanchez-1st

Re: 79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice
 

[quote=wilsowilso;657626]Yeah thanks for linking that. I was lukewarm to the idea of Bradford, but after I read that I went and watched all the tape I could find.

He has a very quick release and is crazy accurate. There just seems to be something about him that looks like he knows something most QB's don't. So if we do pick him that means the decision makers see the same stuff and much more.[/quote]

I completely agree, when I have watched him he makes it look so easy which tells me he can really see the field. He does have a quick release and is really accurate (2 things the current QB doesnt have) which I think will help a lot even if the line is shakey.