Better Decision: Draft/Deal for Bradford or Trade for McNabb/Draft T. Williams?

[SirClintonPortis]

Bradford's value to the Rams was likely near infinite. We probably would have had to trade away an entire draft just to get him.

That said, in the dream world where the price was actually a bit more reasonable, then hell yes. We should have deliberately stunk it up this year by making Grossman the tackling dummy for 2 years(this and next) and have 2 years of high draft picks.

No sarcasm.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

But since McNabb may possibly not be a redskin next year. Would it have been a better investment to have drafted Bradford -- of course, looking back?

McNabb gives you a chance to win now and that is what the Redskins want ...to win now also there never really is a down size to building up your O line,would Bradford have reacted to Shanahan the same way as to Spagnola,....just too many if's.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Bradford looks good now, what would he have looked like behind the Redskins O line,better or worse?

The Skins O-Line is still a lot better then the Rams O-Line. Right now they simply have the benefit of playing against a weak schedule. The Skins on the other hand have faced Ware, Ratliff, Suh, Mario, Peppers, Freeny, Mathis, Cole, Matthews, among others.

The thing about McNabb is that he has at best 3 or 4 years left and with Shanahan coaching the Redskins aren't going to be in position to draft a franchise QB at the top of the draft for a while. At this point they have to hope that a talent like Jake Locker falls to them in the middle of the first round (not that I'm to crazy about Locker these days). However the chance to draft a franchise single caller like Bradford at the top of the first round is now long gone. 2017 might be the next time we get a chance to select a prospect like Bradford.

[freddyg12]

Bradford, he is a long-term answer at QB. Why is everyone acting like he would get killed behind our o-line, maybe if he was drafted by the skins they would sit him for a year at least?

If we'd gotten Bradford it would've been more likely that AH was traded and that in general rebuilding would be underway.

[warriorzpath]

While I'm still on the fence on this, I'm okay with having a good young LT and building a solid O line for now.

But I keep thinking -- when's the next time, if ever, would the redskins be in position to pick up a great young qb like Bradford.

[skinster]

I wonder if our first and second would have been enough for bradford?

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by skinster

I wonder if our first and second would have been enough for bradford?

Franchise Quarterbacks are rare. If the Rams tagged Bradford at "90% sure to be good", we probably have to pay what Chicago paid for Cutler a couple times or more to get him.

[artmonkforhallofamein07]

Trent Williams all the way.

Mcnabb is a bonus. We needed Trent period.

He will be here for years. This guy has played very well for a rookie. Sam Bradfords come and go.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

What if McNabb continues to play sub par? The way you painting the picture it seems like you are looking for someone to say YES it was a huge mistake to get Mcnabb.
You should probably re-name this thread warrorzpath thinks it was a mistake and is looking for some people to agree with him.

I can play devil's advocate as well....what if Bradford goes into a huge sophomore slump next year and never gets out of it...and McNabb and the Redskins win a supebowl in 2012? What would you say about the trade then? Was it a good one?
It is still too early to decide. Question to the people upset with McNabb: Did you honestly think Shanahan and McNabb would be a playoff team in year one?
Even though we got the best LT in the 2010 draft in Trent Williams we are still battling with very poor play from our offensive line. Our center, LG and RT are not playing well. I can not imagine how bad we would be with Bradford and no Trent Williams. We would less than 4-4 right now.
Don't get fixated on the whole young QB fantasy world. I don't care how old or young our QB is or where he was drafted.
We won our first and scond superbowls with 34 year old Joe Thiesmann and 33 year old Doug Williams. Both cast offs from other teams.
I do not need a pretty boy high draft pick QB.

This is what I was trying to say

[SirClintonPortis]

Tom Brady was a "young QB" when he won those Bowls.

Theismann was with us since 1974.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Tom Brady was a "young QB" when he won those Bowls.

Theismann was with us since 1974.

So he is not young anymore....so what?
33 year old Tom Brady is leading the 6-1 patriots and is currently the 5th top rated passer in the NFL. They beat the two of the top teams in Jets and Ravens. That Ravensvs Pats game was played at playoff caliber play and hitting. High level of football. If you like to watch good football, the Steelers vs Patriots game in two weeks will be another high level play and caliber game.

Theismann was drafted by the Miami Dolphins. Theismann went to play in the bush league Canandian Football league. Theismann did not arrive in DC with huge fanfare or on a private jet. He probably flew coach. He was third string and returned punts just to see the field.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

So he is not young anymore....so what?
33 year old Tom Brady is leading the 6-1 patriots and is currently the 5th top rated passer in the NFL. They beat the two of the top teams in Jets and Ravens. That Ravensvs Pats game was played at playoff caliber play and hitting. High level of football. If you like to watch good football, the Steelers vs Patriots game in two weeks will be another high level play and caliber game.

Theismann was drafted by the Miami Dolphins. Theismann went to play in the bush league Canandian Football league. Theismann did not arrive in DC with huge fanfare or on a private jet. He probably flew coach. He was third string and returned punts just to see the field.

Bradford's youth is loved because the longevity of the benefits he would bring, not because it makes him super better right now. So far, he's proven himself capable of playing the game very well and hence he will return 10+ years of greatness for the Rams barring any unfortunate circumstances.

McNabb expiration date is coming soon, and we'd be damned if we don't do something in the near future to cushion the loss.

Sonny and Billy also vowed together to block Theismann because of his attitude.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Which thread is better: This one or the game peanut butter thread.

[ethat001]

I say it's a toss-up. You don't want to pass up a franchise QB, period. But although Bradford looks good now, he's still a gamble and one hard hit on his shoulder away from a bad decision.

Trent Williams (or Okung) will be good for a long long time. Our offensive line completely sucks, and it just makes sense to fix it. With McNabb/TW you fix both positions quickly. The problem is that you haven't fixed the other 4 O-line positions.


After all that, I'd say the QB is more important and drafting Bradford would have been worth it. As has been said, getting a high draft pick to pick another franchise QB is not possible. We'll have to wait for another free agent QB (McNabb, Brees, or Cutler) to become available and/or get lucky with a late rounder like Brady.

[SmootSmack]

Really tough to say, without knowing what we would have given up to get Bradford. What if we could have kept our 2nd and used it to make a move for someone like Marcus McNeil?

Too many variables to really know for sure

Had Bradford been there at #4 I would have taken him over Trent Williams though.