Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1

SmootSmack · 02-27-2010, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

I kind of hate hearing this, not that I don't think that we should focus heavily on the line, but the past is the past. We've had great lines and not come close to approaching the Super Bowl, much less getting into it or winning it. Samuels-Jansen didn't get us there and we had a very good line at the time. We didn't have any good answer at QB though.

Agreed. After all this "proven formula" hasn't won the Super Bowl for us in nearly 20 years.

Pocket$ $traight · 02-28-2010, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Agreed. After all this "proven formula" hasn't won the Super Bowl for us in nearly 20 years.

Well we haven't followed the formula for 20 years.

To compare the championship lines to the Samuels/Jansen/Thomas lines is very simpleminded.

Grimm - 1st team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 3 x all pro
Jacoby - 2nd team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 2 x all pro
Lachey - 2 pro bowls 2 all pros
Bostic - pro bowler
May - pro bowler
Schlereth - pro bowler

Samuels - never all pro
Thomas - never a pro bowler
Jansen - never a pro bowler (pretty overated in my book in general)

The Samuels/Jansen lines NEVER had multiple pro bowlers and NEVER had a single all pro.

Comparing the two is baseless at best.

SmootSmack · 02-28-2010, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

Well we haven't followed the formula for 20 years.

To compare the championship lines to the Samuels/Jansen/Thomas lines is very simpleminded.

Grimm - 1st team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 3 x all pro
Jacoby - 2nd team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 2 x all pro
Lachey - 2 pro bowls 2 all pros
Bostic - pro bowler
May - pro bowler
Schlereth - pro bowler

Samuels - never all pro
Thomas - never a pro bowler
Jansen - never a pro bowler (pretty overated in my book in general)

The Samuels/Jansen lines NEVER had multiple pro bowlers and NEVER had a single all pro.

Comparing the two is baseless at best.

Samuels was never all pro really? Well anyway, if anything our "proven formula" has proven that we don't need to stack the line with first round picks to have a successful offensive line and team

celts32 · 02-28-2010, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

Well we haven't followed the formula for 20 years.

To compare the championship lines to the Samuels/Jansen/Thomas lines is very simpleminded.

Grimm - 1st team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 3 x all pro
Jacoby - 2nd team all decade, 4 pro bowls, 2 x all pro
Lachey - 2 pro bowls 2 all pros
Bostic - pro bowler
May - pro bowler
Schlereth - pro bowler

Samuels - never all pro
Thomas - never a pro bowler
Jansen - never a pro bowler (pretty overated in my book in general)

The Samuels/Jansen lines NEVER had multiple pro bowlers and NEVER had a single all pro.

Comparing the two is baseless at best.

That doesn't surprise me at all. Offensive lines are generally decorated when the team wins. Jansen was very good but that team was never getting 2 pro bowl OL with thier record so when the time came for a pro bowl honor Samuels would always get the honor.

vallin21 · 02-27-2010, 09:49 AM

Schefter's usually spot on so I think Clausen would be there when we pick, but O-line is the most pressing need. Honestly I think the FO is blowing smoke to get out of #4 and let a team who really needs a QB (Broncos, Panthers, Browns) to get Clausen. In the end we'll trade down and get Davis or Campbell.

KI Skins Fan · 02-27-2010, 11:08 AM

This is not argument between whether the Skins need a franchise QB or a better OL. If we're ever going to regularly compete for championships, then I think we can't settle for one or the other. We need both of those things.

The OL is not going to be reconstructed in one draft and it's certainly not going to happen with one 1st round draft pick. But a franchise QB can be obtained with a single draft pick (Peyton Manning) or a single trade (Sonny Jurgensen). Also, as our record improves our draft position will worsen which means that this draft may be our only chance to draft that franchise QB for a long time. That franchise QB could lead our team for as long as 15 years and we can devote every waking moment from the time he is drafted to finding ways to improve our OL.

You see, I think we can be in the top one-quarter of NFL teams, at best, with Jason Campbell or another journeyman at QB and a good OL. To me pretty good isn't nearly good enough. I want the Skins to build a championship-calibre team. Let's remember that the Super Bowls that Shanahan's team won featured John Elway at QB.

So, I think the first job that the Redskins talent-evaluators need to do is to determine if they believe that either Sam Bradford or Jimmy Clausen can be a franchise QB. If they think that neither can be a franchise QB, then they can pick Okung at #4 or trade down, if possible. If they think that both Bradford and Clausen can be franchise QB's, then they can stay put at #4 and take one of them. If they think that only one of them can become a franchise QB, then they need to try to trade up to get the #1 pick and take the QB they want to lead their championship-calbre team of the near future .

CultBrennan59 · 02-27-2010, 02:20 PM

Mattyk, do I have permission to do a Okung or Bradford thread or does that qualify for "Threads you're tired of seeing?"

tryfuhl · 02-27-2010, 02:30 PM

Yet another thread to debate it in? When ultimately it will turn into a Campbell vs Rookie thread?

Lotus · 02-27-2010, 02:46 PM

Yeah, I think Okung vs Bradford vs Clausen vs Jason Campbell is already being discussed in several threads.

NYCskinfan82 · 02-28-2010, 01:58 PM

This is what i would like, we need to find out what Seattle is looking at & see if they will trade up with us for their 2 1st rd picks.

Lotus · 02-28-2010, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYCskinfan82

This is what i would like, we need to find out what Seattle is looking out & see if they will trade up with us for their 2 1st rd picks.

If we can't get Bradford, and Seattle is jonesing for Clausen (Carroll recruited him heavily before), that is a realistic and good trade-down opportunity.

Edit: actually the trade value chart shows that we'd have to throw something significant in to make that happen.

tootergray34 · 03-01-2010, 06:44 AM

Bradford is not a better prospect than Stafford...sorry.

BigHairedAristocrat · 03-01-2010, 10:06 AM

So if the Rams take Bradford and the Lions take Okung, then that means one of the two best players in the draft will be on the board when our pick comes in: McCoy or Suh. we'd have no problem trading down, although i'd find it very very hard to pass on either of those guys.

Drafting Suh/McCoy, keeping J Campbell, and drafting an OT at 36 >>>> Drafting Clausen at 4 and an OT at 36.

While there are always good players at the top of the draft, we're garaunteed one of Suh, MCCoy, Okung or Bradford. Hopefully the Rams do us a favor and take Bradford, saving us from ourselves.

CRedskinsRule · 03-01-2010, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

... saving us from ourselves.

I hate that phrase.

BigHairedAristocrat · 03-01-2010, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I hate that phrase.

perhaps i should say, "saving us from the ghost of snyders past," then. however, from what i've read, Allen is a STRONG believer in building through free agency. Unfortunately, in Tampa Bay he was always shackled by the stingiest owners in the NFL. I'm somewhat concerned that Allen will suffer from the same "kid in a candy store" syndrome that Gibbs said he experienced in his first season back in the NFL. Snyders generosity and willingness to spend money on the team is a great thing, but it can also be very harmful when combined with a GM who is "overzealous." Shanahan and Allen need to be aggressive in free agency, but they also need to excersice some restraint. hopefully, they won't make the same mistakes that gibbs 2.0 made.

02-27-2010, 09:49 AM	#5
vallin21 The Starter Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,180	Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1 Schefter's usually spot on so I think Clausen would be there when we pick, but O-line is the most pressing need. Honestly I think the FO is blowing smoke to get out of #4 and let a team who really needs a QB (Broncos, Panthers, Browns) to get Clausen. In the end we'll trade down and get Davis or Campbell.

02-27-2010, 11:08 AM	#6
KI Skins Fan Pro Bowl Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Jacksonville, Forida Posts: 6,412	Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1 This is not argument between whether the Skins need a franchise QB or a better OL. If we're ever going to regularly compete for championships, then I think we can't settle for one or the other. We need both of those things. The OL is not going to be reconstructed in one draft and it's certainly not going to happen with one 1st round draft pick. But a franchise QB can be obtained with a single draft pick (Peyton Manning) or a single trade (Sonny Jurgensen). Also, as our record improves our draft position will worsen which means that this draft may be our only chance to draft that franchise QB for a long time. That franchise QB could lead our team for as long as 15 years and we can devote every waking moment from the time he is drafted to finding ways to improve our OL. You see, I think we can be in the top one-quarter of NFL teams, at best, with Jason Campbell or another journeyman at QB and a good OL. To me pretty good isn't nearly good enough. I want the Skins to build a championship-calibre team. Let's remember that the Super Bowls that Shanahan's team won featured John Elway at QB. So, I think the first job that the Redskins talent-evaluators need to do is to determine if they believe that either Sam Bradford or Jimmy Clausen can be a franchise QB. If they think that neither can be a franchise QB, then they can pick Okung at #4 or trade down, if possible. If they think that both Bradford and Clausen can be franchise QB's, then they can stay put at #4 and take one of them. If they think that only one of them can become a franchise QB, then they need to try to trade up to get the #1 pick and take the QB they want to lead their championship-calbre team of the near future .

02-27-2010, 02:20 PM	#7
CultBrennan59 Pro Bowl Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 6,526	Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1 Mattyk, do I have permission to do a Okung or Bradford thread or does that qualify for "Threads you're tired of seeing?" __________________ "Anyones better than Madieu Williams"

02-27-2010, 02:30 PM	#8
tryfuhl Gamebreaker Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Waldorf, MD Age: 42 Posts: 12,514	Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1 Yet another thread to debate it in? When ultimately it will turn into a Campbell vs Rookie thread?

02-27-2010, 02:46 PM	#9
Lotus Fire Bruce NOW Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Hattiesburg, MS Posts: 11,434	Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1 Yeah, I think Okung vs Bradford vs Clausen vs Jason Campbell is already being discussed in several threads. __________________ Bruce Allen when in charge alone: 4-12 (.250) Bruce Allen's overall Redskins record : 28-52 (.350) Vinny Cerrato's record when in charge alone: 52-65 (.444) Vinny's overall Redskins record: 62-82 (.430) We won more with Vinny

02-28-2010, 01:58 PM	#10
NYCskinfan82 Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Queens, NYC Age: 56 Posts: 3,803	Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1 This is what i would like, we need to find out what Seattle is looking at & see if they will trade up with us for their 2 1st rd picks. Last edited by NYCskinfan82; 02-28-2010 at 04:20 PM.

03-01-2010, 06:44 AM	#12
tootergray34 Impact Rookie Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Charleston, SC Posts: 681	Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1 Bradford is not a better prospect than Stafford...sorry.

03-01-2010, 10:06 AM	#13
BigHairedAristocrat Playmaker Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 4,712	Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1 So if the Rams take Bradford and the Lions take Okung, then that means one of the two best players in the draft will be on the board when our pick comes in: McCoy or Suh. we'd have no problem trading down, although i'd find it very very hard to pass on either of those guys. Drafting Suh/McCoy, keeping J Campbell, and drafting an OT at 36 >>>> Drafting Clausen at 4 and an OT at 36. While there are always good players at the top of the draft, we're garaunteed one of Suh, MCCoy, Okung or Bradford. Hopefully the Rams do us a favor and take Bradford, saving us from ourselves. __________________ Dolphins get good press for saving drowning humans.But we only hear about the swimmers theyve pushed ashore.You know who we havent heard from: all the people theyve pushed out to sea.Dolphins dont know what theyre doing-they just like pushing things.

Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1

Locker Room Main Forum