79 Mock Drafts: Sam Bradford still Redskins projected choice

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Texanskin

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.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

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).

[Texanskin]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

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.

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

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Texanskin

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

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 edit: 47 sacks (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.

Anyway heres a scouting report on the Falcons O-Line going into 2008:
2008 Offensive Line Breakdowns: The Bunk -- NFL FanHouse
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.

[DIE-NASTY]

Originally Posted by Texanskin

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

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.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by DIE-NASTY

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.

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.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

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.

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.