Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

If Rams draft Bradford, Redskins should rethink No. 4 pick

Over at The League, you can read Mark Maske's report about today's comments from quarterbacks Sam Bradford and Jimmy Clausen during their media availability at the scouting combine.

The buzz is that the St. Louis Rams are strongly considering selecting Bradford with the No. 1 overall pick, which could shake up the draft. The thinking before this weekend was that the Rams would use the first pick on defensive tackle Ndamukong Suh.

Bradford and Clausen are considered the top available quarterbacks. If the Rams select Bradford, a player the Redskins are believed to be high on, would the Redskins choose Clausen with the fourth pick despite the supposed concerns of many teams about his leadership ability?

Pro Bowl left tackle Chris Samuels plans to retire because of a severe neck injury and the Redskins lack talent and depth along the offensive line. The team is in contract talks to re-sign dependable center Casey Rabach, who could become an unrestricted free agent next week, and Washington is expected to attempt to bolster the line during the offseason.

If Bradford is off the board when the Redskins pick, they could go the tackle route and continue to focus on the line with their second selection (No. 37 overall). The unit is in need of a major makeover, which is long overdue.

By Jason Reid  |  February 28, 2010; 10:02 AM ET
Categories:  Jason Reid  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Bradford not opposed to playing for Redskins
Next: Redskins make an offer to Daniels

Comments

So wait, we're claiming that if the Rams take Bradford, we would have to "rethink" our pick? I thought we could also take Bradford, then challenge the Rams to a steel-cage death match to see who would really get him.
Where is that fantasy rulebook when you need it?

Posted by: daggar | February 28, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Bradford did not bring up the NA connection... and tried to not even answer. Forced to answer "would you have a problem..." Bradford simply said "no".

Is the moron reporter who asked the questions a) your brother? or b) simply a cousin?

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe

The less civilized and educated tend to call names rather than have an open dialogue. Don't look in the mirror anytime soon.
Coaches, especially Zorn with zero experience are often hamstrung by politics in the NFL.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | February 28, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Dude was our second most productive receiver last year. How much will he earn this year? He's in the last year of his contract. If the guys who couldn't beat him out last year can step up and do it this year (and stay healthy), then cut him. Until then you keep him.

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 9:40 AM


LS, I'm usually in step with that line of thinking (i.e.-- my argument for keeping guys like Betts and Cartwright), but in the case of ARE he's on the books for $5 million. I don't care what year of his contract he's in, if you have a guy who is no better than 3rd on your depth chart making $5 mil, that's a waste. Especially when you have young guys on the roster who are more than capable (or at least were drafted to be) of filling his spot. I could see if he were a big-time return man, but he's the exact opposite of that.

A depth chart of Moss, DT, Kelly, Marko, and some player to be named later is more than sufficient, at least for 2010.

I've said it a million times on here...this uncapped season is the Redskins' once in a lifetime "get out of jail free" card. All those big salaries they handed out to guys who didn't live up to their dollar amount can be gone, no strings attached. That's what 2010 is about. Whether we miss ARE on the depth chart or not (and I think we won't), we have to purge this roster of the big money, low impact players NOW. This opportunity may not come again.

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 28, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Let me fix this quote.

"If Bradford is still on the board when the Redskins pick, they should go the tackle route and continue to focus on the line with their second selection (No. 37 overall). The unit is in need of a major makeover, which is long overdue."

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

The less civilized and educated tend to call names rather than have an open dialogue. Don't look in the mirror anytime soon.
Sardonic or ironic? You make the call.

Posted by: daggar | February 28, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

F Bradford, F Claussen. Get Okung.

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 28, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Okung tweaked his hammy at the combine and will not finish all the drills.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 28, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Those who post stupid crap like to fall back on "its my opinion and I'm entitled to participate in the dialogue" as a defense for their moronic ramblings when they get called out over them.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | February 28, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

"Dude was our second most productive receiver last year." (with 50 receptions)

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 9:40 AM

Seen this argument before with regards to ARE. And the stat is true, but name ONE game that ARE had an impact on. 50 receptions, second leading receiver, not one big play. Yeah he grabbed a couple of third down catches, but he scares no D, changes no game, and is not gonna get any better. I don't think we need to talk about his punt returns. He costs the team a lot of money and does not live up to the salary.

We can do better.

Posted by: edvar | February 28, 2010 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Okung tweaked his hammy at the combine and will not finish all the drills.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 28, 2010 10:50 AM |

I think it was actually his groin but not sure.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

this reid dude with his excuses for poor baby jason campbell are getting boring and old. CAMPBELL IS HORRIBE, WE NEED A NEW QUATERBACK FIRST.

Posted by: cavalieri10 | February 28, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

we have to purge this roster of the big money, low impact players NOW. This opportunity may not come again.

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 28, 2010 10:36 AM

Please repost this every day.

Posted by: edvar | February 28, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Okung tweaked his hammy at the combine and will not finish all the drills.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 28, 2010 10:50 AM |

I think it was actually his groin but not sure.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 11:02 AM |

You are correct.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 28, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Please repost this every day.

Wow.
I'm speechless.
I'm...
wow.

Posted by: daggar | February 28, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

He costs the team a lot of money and does not live up to the salary.

We can do better.

Posted by: edvar | February 28, 2010 11:01 AM

March 5th is the day 2010 is officially an uncapped year. I'd be shocked if he makes it to March 6th. Shanny and Allen may show patience and wait but ARE and Portis will not be on the 53 man roster.

I appreciate the stubbornness and the role of being the blog contrarian that old man L-S brings to RI, but this is worse than his Suisham arguments. To quote Kornheiser (L-S’s idol), ARE and Portis are in got’s to go situations.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

March 5th is the day 2010 is officially an uncapped year. I'd be shocked if he makes it to March 6th. Shanny and Allen may show patience and wait but ARE and Portis will not be on the 53 man roster.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:10 AM

Holy smackaroley! You're right. Brownwood's right. All you all are right. ARE's a goner.

I thought ARE's contract was up at the end of next year and that we were only paying him like $3 million in cash this year. I didn't adquately allow for Snyder and Cerrato's generosity (stupidity?) when they signed this guy. I just looked up his contract to shove it up your nose and wow! it's not in your nose. It's in me. Here's what I found:

"Redskins WR/PR Antwaan Randle El is due a $4.25 million salary in 2010, plus a $6.25 million offseason roster bonus."

"Randle El's salary drops to $1.95M if the bonus is paid before August 31, but he's likely played his last down in burgundy and gold, no matter who coaches the team. The 30-year-old is still a decent slot receiver, finishing 2009 with 50 grabs for 530 yards, but offers no vertical ability and is totally ineffective on punt returns. He's not worth close to $8.2 million."

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

QB LeFevour just ran a 4.64 40yd dash at the combine

Posted by: noonefromtampa | February 28, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

League Source...

With all due respect...have you seen the Redskins' offense? With the exception of Fred Davis and maybe Devin Thomas, you can't make a case to keep any of those scrubs. It's typical fandom to want to hold on to mediocre players for fear of the unknown BUT...

ARE is garbage! This is the time to move on...

Also, I think Portis is gone.

Posted by: rickyroge | February 28, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Rams are just playin the Skins with the Bradford rumor waiting for El Danny to divy up a buncha picks to move up like ususal.

FORGET THE RAMS. FORGET BRADFORD.

OKUNG OKUNG OKING OKUNG OKUNG OKUNG OKUNG.

or draft down.

Posted by: dovelevine | February 28, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

My #1 option at #4 regardless of who is on the board in to trade down for more picks

If we could get an extra 2nd round and a 3rd round, that would be huge

If we can't trade down and the draft goes Bradford-Okung-Suh, take McCoy & keep the 4-3 defense (remember #1 axiom of coaching is to tailor your scheme to the personnel not the other way around)

If the draft goes Bradford-Suh-McCoy, take Okung

Posted by: noonefromtampa | February 28, 2010 11:39 AM | Report abuse

Bad grammar and spelling is fine

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 9:17 AM

You know, when I went to Georgia Tech they taught us that "bad grammar and spelling ARE fine." And, like you, I've always assumed that they was rigth.


Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

roflol, TE

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

rickyroge -- glad I finally convinced you that ARE should go! (you are right)

My trade scenario:

Redskins give up their #1 in this year's draft to a team drafting in the top ten for: their numbers 2 and 3 in this year's draft plus their numbers 1 and 3 in next year's draft.

We get more picks in this draft, plus we position ourselves to trade up to grab an elite QB in the next draft.

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

QB LeFevour just ran a 4.64 40yd dash at the combine

Posted by: noonefromtampa | February 28, 2010 11:32 AM

LeFevour & John Skelton are the two that I'm intrigued by.

Tebow ran a 4.70 & 4.72

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Bad grammar and spelling is fine

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 9:17 AM

You know, when I went to Georgia Tech they taught us that "bad grammar and spelling ARE fine." And, like you, I've always assumed that they was rigth.


Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

roflol, TE

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 11:40 AM

I'm sure glad we have someone here to spell out the fine nuances of humor by way of sarcasm and irony for the less than perceptive.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

"OKUNG OKUNG OKING OKUNG OKUNG OKUNG OKUNG.
or draft down.Posted by: dovelevine"

You think Okung will be there at 4? I'm not sure how Detroit passes on him.

And this drafting down bit -- assume you mean trade down. Easier said than done. Most teams will see this as a deep draft rather than one with sure-fire stars at the very top. So why wouldn't they want to hold on to those mid and low firsts and pay a lot less money for about the same quality?

Only reason I can see for a team to trade up into the top four is for a shot at one of those QBs -- but first a team will have to fall in love with, say, Jimmy Clausen. How likely do you think that is?

Plus teams will want to trade players rather than picks, the way the Jets did with Cleveland. That worked because Eric Mangini had been the Jets' coach before he went to the Browns.

Posted by: Samson151 | February 28, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

L-S

Holy smackaroley! You're right.

I wouldn't say that I bat .1000 but easily one of the highest % on RI.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

I wouldn't say that I bat .1000 but easily one of the highest % on RI.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:47 AM |

Weren't you the one that told me batting 500 was actually supposed to be .500?

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

L-S

Holy smackaroley! You're right.

I wouldn't say that I bat .1000 but easily one of the highest % on RI.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse
Right, Diesel. I have you batting about .135, well ahead of the rest of us.

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

L-S

Holy smackaroley! You're right.

I wouldn't say that I bat .1000 but easily one of the highest % on RI.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse
Right, Diesel. I have you batting about .135, well ahead of the rest of us.

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

And by the way, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. Batting .1000 is actually lower than .135.

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

decimal place error, I went to Maryland, not Georgia Tech.

I'll laugh at myself on that one too and I'll continue to set the bar for accuracy and laugh at most of your posts as well..

1.000

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

I wouldn't say that I bat .1000 but easily one of the highest % on RI.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:47 AM

Well, most of the guys up here I can just dismiss them with vague generalities or first-order principles. With you, it pays to get my facts in order. And when the facts go against me, as they did here, I wish I'd just kept my yap shut. Or -- more accurately -- my fingers on something other than my keyboard.

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

NFL Combine 40 times

Devin Thomas- 4.42 (didn't know he was that fast)

Marko Mitchell- 4.51

Malcolm Kelly- 4.64

Larry Fitzgerald- 4.68

Posted by: rickyroge | February 28, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

wouldn't say that I bat .1000 but easily one of the highest % on RI.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:47 AM

I see humility is one of your strong suits as well.

I'll laugh at myself on that one too and I'll continue to set the bar for accuracy and laugh at most of your posts as well..

1.000

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:58 AM |

You keep laughing because I'm sure most of us think you take yourself waaay too seriously. Chill out and relax...it's a blog Mr. Accuracy.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Golden Tate 4.36 40. wow

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Oh yeah...Santana Moss' Combine 40 time...

1st Run...4.36

2nd run...4.22

SICK!

Posted by: rickyroge | February 28, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

You keep laughing because I'm sure most of us think you take yourself waaay too seriously. Chill out and relax...it's a blog Mr. Accuracy.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 12:03 PM

Good point, Mr. confrontational.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

I went to Maryland, not Georgia Tech.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 11:58 AM

Did you "graduate" or "just go there?" I went to Maryland a few times myself, but I had trouble finding a parking space.

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Trade Randel El for a 3rd rounder. This blog stinks.

Posted by: Rahtard | February 28, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Did you "graduate" or "just go there?" I went to Maryland a few times myself, but I had trouble finding a parking space.

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 12:13 PM

UMD undergrad: over $1000 spent in parking tickets in 4 yrs
Mount Saint Marys grad: not 1 parking ticket in 2 yrs.

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

A third rounder for Randle-El....Hell NO!

I'll give you a half case of Miluakee's Best and three buttons!

Posted by: rickyroge | February 28, 2010 12:22 PM | Report abuse

UMD undergrad: over $1000 spent in parking tickets in 4 yrs
Mount Saint Marys grad: not 1 parking ticket in 2 yrs.


Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse
Then I'll have to raise your BA to something higher than .135. I taught at MSM for 25 years.

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Here's why I cringe at the thought of drafting D-linemen with a top six pick -- the last ten drafts, for instance:

2009 Tyson Jackson
2008 Chris Long, Glenn Dorsey, Vern Gholston(if you count him as a DE)
2007 Gaines Adams
2006 Mario Williams
2005 No selections
2004 No selections
2003 DeWayne Robertson, Johnathan Sullivan
2002 Julius Peppers, Ryan Sims
2001 Gerard Warren, Richard Seymour
2000 Courtney Brown, Corey Simon
1999 no selection


Posted by: Samson151 | February 28, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Why not CJ Spiller with the #4 pick...if you've seen him play it's not a reach!

Posted by: rickyroge | February 28, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Let me fix this quote.

"If Bradford is still on the board when the Redskins pick, they should go the tackle route and continue to focus on the line with their second selection (No. 37 overall). The unit is in need of a major makeover, which is long overdue."

Posted by: Diesel44 | February 28, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

"F Bradford, F Claussen. Get Okung."

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 28, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

In accord with you both. However we do it, we need three top o-linemen this year. OKUNG would be a great way to begin.

This year's post-draft picks are going to be even more important than prior years because of so many underclassmen entering this draft. There should be some excellent prospects available after the draft is concluded. The REDSKINS scouts should be working OT right now. I'm assuming they are.

Some players which MIGHT be overlooked in the draft that I would recommend to the 'SKINS front office:

TONY WASHINGTON OT Abiline Christian
ED WANG OT Virginia Tech
MATT McCRACKEN OG Richmond
ADRIAN TRACY OLB William&Mary
ARTHUR MOATS OLB James Madison
JARVIS GEATHERS OLB Central Florida
TERRELL WHITEHEAD FS Norfolk State

WASHINGTON, McCRACKEN and WHITEHEAD's stock has been rising since the regular season while WANG's has dropped considerably.

TRACY and MOATS were down DE rushers who played pass-protection in limited space. They have the athleticism however to play the LB slot in a 3-4.

GEATHERS was a traditional OLB if I've got my info correct.

I'll keep working on this list because I really feel this is an important aspect of the team re-build.

And along that vein, why not cut ARE now, and dump his salary vs. having him compete for a job in preseason, and have to deal with his contract IF he doesn't make the cut then?

Posted by: glawrence007 | February 28, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Check out this blog on "The Jason Campbell debate"
http://billythedistinguishedgentlemen.blogspot.com/

Posted by: b145579 | February 28, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Here's why I cringe at the thought of drafting D-linemen with a top six pick -- the last ten drafts, for instance:

2009 Tyson Jackson
2008 Chris Long, Glenn Dorsey, Vern Gholston(if you count him as a DE)
2007 Gaines Adams
2006 Mario Williams
2005 No selections
2004 No selections
2003 DeWayne Robertson, Johnathan Sullivan
2002 Julius Peppers, Ryan Sims
2001 Gerard Warren, Richard Seymour
2000 Courtney Brown, Corey Simon
1999 no selection

Posted by: Samson151 | February 28, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

It's even worse when you look at DT's drafted in the top 5 since 1990. Between Steve Etman, Dewayne Roberston, Darrell Russell, Gerrard Warren, and Dan Wilkinson Russell is the only one to make a real impact on the field...and a bigger one off it. In short Russell is the only pro bowler (then again we all know how accurate the pro bowl is).

Posted by: CapsXXVI | February 28, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Why not CJ Spiller with the #4 pick...if you've seen him play it's not a reach!

Posted by: rickyroge | February 28, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Probably not, but with PORTIS in the house, and his contract in tow (a detriment to moving him in a trade), I've got to believe we need o-linemen more right now. We'll have to waive CP now for RB to become a priority. I think management decides to deal with him later. If he stays, it pushes the need for a top RB down the list of priorities IMHO. And backs can be had in lower rounds that work out well. Of course, that can be said of any position really.

Posted by: glawrence007 | February 28, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

My trade scenario:

Redskins give up their #1 in this year's draft to a team drafting in the top ten for: their numbers 2 and 3 in this year's draft plus their numbers 1 and 3 in next year's draft.

We get more picks in this draft, plus we position ourselves to trade up to grab an elite QB in the next draft.

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 11:44 AM
=================================
nice thought.. But, one problem.. No one wants to trade up and give up picks in the deepest quality Draft since 1983. Too bad Skins are missing two picks this year...

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | February 28, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

I think we need to be flexible with the first pick in the draft. I think we should pick whomever can help us the most, as long as its a Tackle!!!

Forget the damn QB pick, lets make sure we don't have an "I don't want to grow up, I want to be a Toys"R"Us Oline".

Posted by: ndickover | February 28, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

They need more picks ... whatever it takes to accomplish that ... maybe because of the silly contracts that isn't possible ... they could even finish .500 or above both overall and in the division with some luck and some canny choices.

But, yeah, I don't see how that can be accomplished either.

Posted by: periculum | February 28, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

And backs can be had in lower rounds that work out well. Of course, that can be said of any position really.

Posted by: glawrence007 | February 28, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

But you're right to emphasize that RB's can be found in later rounds, because with a good line, just about any RB will be able to do all right, whereas even the best RB's can do anything without a good offensive line.

Posted by: OintheSierras | February 28, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

That was supposed to be "can't" do anything without a good offensive line, of course.

Posted by: OintheSierras | February 28, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

They need more picks ... whatever it takes to accomplish that ... maybe because of the silly contracts that isn't possible ... they could even finish .500 or above both overall and in the division with some luck and some canny choices.

But, yeah, I don't see how that can be accomplished either.

Posted by: periculum | February 28, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse
So peri, should we trade our #4 pick for a 3rd, a 4th, a 5th a 6th and a 7th? That would give us more picks. And I'm certain there are some teams out there who would make that trade.

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

But you're right to emphasize that RB's can be found in later rounds, because with a good line, just about any RB will be able to do all right, whereas even the best RB's can do anything without a good offensive line.

Posted by: OintheSierras | February 28, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

That was supposed to be "can't" do anything without a good offensive line, of course.

Posted by: OintheSierras | February 28, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse
I do agree with you, Oin. And Shanny has demonstrated that numerous times. I suspect that we will draft either a RB or a speedy returner in the later rounds.

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

But you're right to emphasize that RB's can be found in later rounds, because with a good line, just about any RB will be able to do all right, whereas even the best RB's can do anything without a good offensive line.

Posted by: OintheSierras | February 28, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

That was supposed to be "can't" do anything without a good offensive line, of course.

Posted by: OintheSierras | February 28, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse
I do agree with you, Oin. And Shanny has demonstrated that numerous times. I suspect that we will draft either a RB or a speedy returner in the later rounds.

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

still talking QB. unbelievable.

Posted by: lszovati | February 28, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Bottom line draft best player available with first pick regardless of position!! And yes i'm going to say it, the Skins don't have a franchise QB! If you can get one at 4 do it!

Posted by: brinstonz | February 28, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

We need a QB, but I guess if we draft a Tackle, all of our QB problems will be solved...

(end sarcasm)

Posted by: rickyroge | February 28, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse


First Skins should send a lovely bouquet to the Rams for taking Bradford, then hit their knees in thanks they didn't grab a delicate flower who breaks when defenders land on him.

This is not the year to risk that high a pick on an iffy QB. Try your damndest to trade down with someone with the hots for McCoy or Suh. They should give up a one and two/three, depending on their position) then grab the best linemen you can.With a first rounds and two seconds, you should have three guys starting full time by the end of next season.

Posted by: TheCork | February 28, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

We need a QB, but I guess if we draft a Tackle, all of our QB problems will be solved...

(end sarcasm)


Posted by: rickyroge | February 28, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

No need to be sarcastic about the truth ric.

Posted by: glawrence007 | February 28, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

If Bradford is off the board when the Redskins pick, they could go the tackle route and continue to focus on the line with their second selection (No. 37 overall). The unit is in need of a major makeover, which is long overdue.

By Jason Reid | February 28, 2010; 10:02 AM ET
==================================
A legit 1st round QB can turnaround a team.. A legit 1st round OT can improve a portion of the line. If there was a legit 1st round qb after Bradford, I'd say grab him. But, with Bradford gone.. I would agree a Tackle makes more sense..
If Skins take a tackle..and retain Campbell without signing him to an extension... it will send a signal that the regular season games in 2010 will be glorified lame duck scrimmages. And Shanny remains in the hunt for his legit NFL QB by Trade of Draft.

One possible scenario, after Campbell is signed for one year... The NFL trade deadline is mid October.. If one of the other 31 NFL teams has a QB go down with an injury before this deadline (some team surely will).. Skins could command a much better Trade price tag for Jason, than they do now, from such a team desperate for a starting QB or to replace a backup that has moved up to a Starter.

Before all you JC fans start freakin on this posting.. Shanny and Kyle have had two months to watch every play of last year. Which is what they said they were doing... So, it would lead one to believe that if JC and his agent have not seen a Contract Extension, by now, then the Shanahans must not be convinced that JC is the long term answer for the Skins at QB.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | February 28, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Bucs place highest tender on LT Donald Penn which would make a team signing him give up a 1st and 3rd round picks.

Posted by: noonefromtampa | February 28, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

I don't pretend to know much about the technical aspects of the NFL, but let me just say this and I think old Redskin fans who remember the great teams of the 80's will agree: it's all about the offensive line! Those guys that we see at every home game dressed as "Hogs" aren't making a statement about a QB or any other position. Let me just state this fact-The Steelers, who didn't make the playoffs this year had a fairly bad secondary, but they had a totally lousy offensive line. I thought Big Ben did a pretty good job considering this. I also think that Jason didn't do a half bad job for us. What would the record have been for each of these teams if they had on O line as good as say the Cowpies. Spend the money wisely! O lines can win Superbowls.

Posted by: houndiedad | February 28, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Trading down makes sense if you have an established and proven front office, but I say all line issues should be mostly addressed by free-agency and horse record...Obtaining some useful speed like Spiller or McClusters (who are going to rawk da League) in first round makes sense..Bradford and McCoy (who looked like a lock till that injury in the championship) are too iffy, no surefire QBs for a rookie front office, imo...

Posted by: frak | February 28, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

O lines can win Superbowls.

Posted by: houndiedad
______________________

A strong Oline can make Timmy Smith into Wonderdog!

Posted by: Oogalaboogala | February 28, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

I think the whole question about drafting a QB at #4 depends on whether one sees a true franchise quarterback available at #4. If you see someone that you can really build around, and you don't have someone already, you take him. But it's a wasted pick if the guy isn't going to be a solid franchise quarterback. I am hoping that Shanahan can evaluate these quarterbacks well. If you don't have a franchise QB available at #4, then it makes much more sense to draft an OT (since we have line needs as well), and either go with the current Mr. Mediocre or sign someone else's Mr. Mediocre for QB.

Posted by: OintheSierras | February 28, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

What time does the US kick Canada's azz in hockey today?

Posted by: Oogalaboogala | February 28, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

There is absolutely nothing we can do about what Shanahan and Allen do with this draft and FA. I'm just going to sit back and trust the two of them.

Skins win the East in 2010!!!!

Posted by: iH8dallas | February 28, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

I do agree with you, Oin. And Shanny has demonstrated that numerous times. I suspect that we will draft either a RB or a speedy returner in the later rounds.

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 1:27 PM |

And I agree with you, Fred. That seems to be his way, and he has been successful. One can hope the pattern repeats. The O line is so important. It's like good defense in the NBA: it covers up a lot of Offensive (and "offensive" any way you will : )shortcomings on the team.

Posted by: OintheSierras | February 28, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

It cracks me up how J Reid consistently goes out of his way to protect Campbell. Talk about a mancrush. J Reid clearly hates the idea of Shanahan drafting his boy's replacement. First, J Reid went out of his way to say Bradford would be a risk at four. Now that league insiders are telling him that Bradford is so good the rams will have no choice but to take him at number one, Reid is shifting his focus to trashing Clausen.

Fine, maybe Clausen isn't worth the number four pick. Personally, I don't have much of an opinion on him or Bradford; I'll leave that up to Shanahan. But I do know Shanahan is on record as saying the first thing he looks for in a QB is accuracy, and that, my friends, does not bode well for JC. His high completion percentage is the product of screen passes and check downs, nothing more. He simply has no downfield accuracy and rarely hits guys in stride on the intermediate stuff.

Shanahan views JC as a one year stop gap at best. He is going to find another QB somehow, someway. And J Reid will then have to find another guy to crush on.

Posted by: MylesMonroe | February 28, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

What time does the US kick Canada's azz in hockey today?

Posted by: Oogalaboogala | February 28, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

3 EST.

Posted by: frediefritz | February 28, 2010 2:14 PM | Report abuse

[1] First Skins should send a lovely bouquet to the Rams for taking Bradford, then hit their knees in thanks they didn't grab a delicate flower who breaks when defenders land on him.

This is not the year to risk that high a pick on an iffy QB.

[2] Try your damndest to trade down with someone with the hots for McCoy or Suh. They should give up a one and two/three, depending on their position) then grab the best linemen you can. With a first round and two seconds, you should have three guys starting full time by the end of next season.

Posted by: TheCork
_____________________

I don't think part [1] of that is that simple. If we do draft a QB, they probably won't play in 2010 anyway, so they're not really at risk (due to our weak/rebuilding Oline). I fully expect Shanny to make the Oline very good, if not extremely good, by 2011. And we can get value (picks) for Campbell this year but not next - I think we should jump on that. And wasn't Bradford's 2nd injury a re-injury because he came back too soon? Everybody gets injured... there's no reason, if Doc Andrews and Shanny say that injury is not an issue, to not believe them... we'll see.

If Bradford's healthy, and Shanny thinks he's the real deal, I'm fine with that pick. If not, I'm fine with Okung, if we can get him.

However I fully agree with part [2], that'd be the overall best scenario IMO.

Posted by: Oogalaboogala | February 28, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Fredegar.

Posted by: Oogalaboogala | February 28, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

When the gurus say that this draft is especially strong in offensive tackles, what they really mean is deep. There are five or six tackles and a couple guards who meet all the measurables and skill requirements for their respective positions. And right below those is another crop of quite respectable linemen who could develop into something special with time. So if you need somebody to start at tackle, maybe not right away but in good time, then this is your draft.

That doesn't mean that teams are able to predict who is going to give best value as a high pick, say, a number four. That's still a bit of a crapshoot.

I don't think anyone at the Combine would bet six months salary that Okung will turn out to be better than Trent Williams, Anthony Davis, or Brian Bulaga. They're too close. And none jumps out at you the way Anthony Munoz or Jonathan Ogden did. Or even Joe Thomas, for example.

Chris Samuels was a bit of a risk when he was drafted, too. So it can work out really well.

Posted by: Samson151 | February 28, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

First Skins should send a lovely bouquet to the Rams for taking Bradford, then hit their knees in thanks they didn't grab a delicate flower who breaks when defenders land on him.

This is not the year to risk that high a pick on an iffy QB. Try your damndest to trade down with someone with the hots for McCoy or Suh. They should give up a one and two/three, depending on their position) then grab the best linemen you can.With a first rounds and two seconds, you should have three guys starting full time by the end of next season.

Posted by: TheCork | February 28, 2010 1:39 PM |

Rarely do TheCork and I agree but on this I am in total agreement. And yes diesel I realize that I am confrontational and I am working on the level of venom. Baby steps my man.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

OK let me say this in a little simpler terms: The Skins chances of being a Superbowl team are a lot better with Jason Campbell and a GREAT offensive line than with Sam Bradford or Jimmy Clauson or even Johnny Unitas and the crap we have right now on the O line. Understand people?

Posted by: houndiedad | February 28, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Nothing more venomous than the ten-year old rattlesnakes that used to move rock on 11th Street..Kill ya in a heartbeat!!

Posted by: frak | February 28, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Shanahan views JC as a one year stop gap at best. He is going to find another QB somehow, someway. And J Reid will then have to find another guy to crush on.

Posted by: MylesMonroe | February 28, 2010 2:12 PM
========================
now that you mention it... I do see J Reid's protectionism of Jason.. for that matter most of the WaPo writers except Boswell seem to look the other way regarding Jason's shortcomings..
The most recent example... Not one Wash Post writer mentioned the typical recent JC non-rally... The 4 straight incompletes at the end of the San Diego game.. Where the Skins only had to get to the SD 40 yard line for a tying Field Goal....The last incompletion being a bizarre out of bounds Hail Mary... Whether it was intentional of not.. It prevented his QB Rating from dropping.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | February 28, 2010 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Best scenario would be to get Bradford at #4. Fall back scenario would be to get the delicate Mr. Okung who was too fragile to finish the combine drills. Major red flag there. Might betta slide the big strong tackle from Rutgers to the top of the draft board.

Posted by: coparker5 | February 28, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Love the frequent "it's simple" statements on here that ignore all the moving parts...

Posted by: Oogalaboogala | February 28, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

erm, my bad..I'd agree O-line is the top priority so any moves in that direction is good..The WR/KR from Cincy U. has some hyperdrive..Ovechkin will now shed his Russkie uniform and will start for the US..

Posted by: frak | February 28, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Best scenario would be to get Bradford at #4. Fall back scenario would be to get the delicate Mr. Okung who was too fragile to finish the combine drills. Major red flag there. Might betta slide the big strong tackle from Rutgers to the top of the draft board.

Posted by: coparker5 | February 28, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Nice to see someone else that makes sense.

Posted by: Redskins001 | February 28, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Best scenario would be to get Bradford at #4. Fall back scenario would be to get the delicate Mr. Okung who was too fragile to finish the combine drills. Major red flag there. Might betta slide the big strong tackle from Rutgers to the top of the draft board.

Posted by: coparker5 | February 28, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Nice to see someone else that makes sense.

Posted by: Redskins001 | February 28, 2010 2:54 PM |

Yea, you two are right. Skip on the delicate lineman for the even more delicate quarterback that refuses to finish the combine (ie throw a damn football, you're a phukin quarterback.) You guys need to think before you type.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Pavelski, Thornton, Boyle, Marleau and Heatley.

Its Shark on Shark action for Olympic Gold

Posted by: zcezcest1 | February 28, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

yes, my plan for tha Rams is coming to fruition.

This would be good news, for i believe it'll be easier to trade out if Bradford is gone.

i knew it wouldn't take long for the Rams to figure out that you don't win the game of football in tha trenches.

Keep Campbell and draft O-line O-line O-line. oh and keep Portis; he's got a lot left.

Posted by: Vicc | February 28, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

So the thinking around here is that, if the skins keep Campbell they will recreate the HOGs for him but if they draft a QB they won't bother to improve the line? Cause it has to be either-or, can't possibly get a QB and rebuild the line.

Posted by: coparker5 | February 28, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4954227

Schefter says FS A. Rolle will test FA waters.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | February 28, 2010 3:13 PM | Report abuse

And yes diesel I realize that I am confrontational and I am working on the level of venom. Baby steps my man.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 2:28 PM

You guys need to think before you type.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 3:05 PM |

-------------------------------------

Ooops! One step forward then two steps back. But, you forgot to say "Mother, may I?"

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

anyone that says another person has a man crush(another inane way to call a person a homo-sexual, usually by a white person)are they themselves a closet homosexual. All european so-called societies are full of homosexuals, including, greeks. romans, so-called arab's etc. it is part of YOUR culture. draft down get more picks fix o-line draft a qb at 3rd or 4th round.

Posted by: wathu19 | February 28, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Great players and future All-Pros can be had at any spot in the draft.

Finding your Franchise QB and rebuilding the O-line in the same draft is not impossible.

noonefromtampa,

i see McClain has entered into our possible draft selections. That'd be great cuz London Fletcher can't play forever.

Posted by: Vicc | February 28, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

And yes diesel I realize that I am confrontational and I am working on the level of venom. Baby steps my man.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 2:28 PM

You guys need to think before you type.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 3:05 PM |

-------------------------------------

Ooops! One step forward then two steps back. But, you forgot to say "Mother, may I?"

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 3:20 PM | R

Ah, you are incorrect my dear friend. Usually I would have said think before you type you phuking degenerate d-bag. See? Progress.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

anyone that says another person has a man crush ... are they themselves a closet homosexual.

Posted by: wathu19 | February 28, 2010 3:23 PM

Is that what that means? Wow. I always thought it was a wrestling move.

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

To me a QB not throwing at the combine shows 2 things
1. Arrogance
2.That if a player has a "hurt shoulder" and they are afraid to throw in a practice drill, then how can they possibly make it in the NFL. NFL QB's play banged up all the time, pain is part of the game.

Posted by: iH8dallas | February 28, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

anyone that says another person has a man crush(another inane way to call a person a homo-sexual, usually by a white person)are they themselves a closet homosexual. All european so-called societies are full of homosexuals, including, greeks. romans, so-called arab's etc. it is part of YOUR culture. draft down get more picks fix o-line draft a qb at 3rd or 4th round.

Posted by: wathu19 | February 28, 2010 3:23 PM |

Flawed logic at best my man. I believe that a man crush insinuates a great liking for an individual that doesn't include sexual interest. Your further inclination towards rascism reduces your credibility even more. Tighten up.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

getting too quiet on this board.. time to stir it up...

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/messages/thread/19208537

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | February 28, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

anyone that says another person has a man crush(another inane way to call a person a homo-sexual, usually by a white person)are they themselves a closet homosexual. All european so-called societies are full of homosexuals, including, greeks. romans, so-called arab's etc. it is part of YOUR culture. draft down get more picks fix o-line draft a qb at 3rd or 4th round.

Posted by: wathu19 | February 28, 2010 3:23 PM |

Flawed logic at best my man. I believe that a man crush insinuates a great liking for an individual that doesn't include sexual interest. Your further inclination towards rascism reduces your credibility even more. Tighten up.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

This a really stupid conversation, just so you guys know.

Posted by: iH8dallas | February 28, 2010 3:37 PM | Report abuse

To me a QB not throwing at the combine shows 2 things
1. Arrogance
2.That if a player has a "hurt shoulder" and they are afraid to throw in a practice drill, then how can they possibly make it in the NFL. NFL QB's play banged up all the time, pain is part of the game.

Posted by: iH8dallas | February 28, 2010 3:33 PM

It only shows me one thing: intelligence. Why throw when you don't have to? They'll come to your school and watch you throw to receivers you've worked with. What's to be gained by throwing to a random bunch of doofuses you've never met before who may or may not be able to run a route and to make a catch that will make you look good?

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

It only shows me one thing: intelligence. Why throw when you don't have to? They'll come to your school and watch you throw to receivers you've worked with. What's to be gained by throwing to a random bunch of doofuses you've never met before who may or may not be able to run a route and to make a catch that will make you look good?

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

You are entitled to your opinion, and I have mine.

If I am a GM and going to look at QB's at the combine, and they say "I'm not throwing", I mark that down in my little notebook and tell him,"OK, I'm sorry to hear that."

Posted by: iH8dallas | February 28, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

This a really stupid conversation, just so you guys know.

Posted by: iH8dallas | February 28, 2010 3:37 PM |

Thanks for your critique. I'll take it under advisement.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

I mark that down in my little notebook and tell him,"OK, I'm sorry to hear that."

Posted by: iH8dallas | February 28, 2010 3:46 PM

And then .... you send scouts to his pro day and decide whether he can throw.

Actually, if you're a GM you've had your scouts watch him live and look at game films -- not pro days and not combine throws which have as much to do with being a pro QB as tic-tac-toe has to chess.

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

This post is total BS!

First off....

The skins brass is not stupid enough to give the media anything.

What makes anyone think that they like Bradford anyway?

This is classic Shanny.... If he likes someone, you better believe that nobody will know

I.E Cutler

Clausen is the guy. I hope the Rams do pick Bradford because we want Clausen

Posted by: byrdinthesky | February 28, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

So wait, we're claiming that if the Rams take Bradford, we would have to "rethink" our pick? I thought we could also take Bradford, then challenge the Rams to a steel-cage death match to see who would really get him.
Where is that fantasy rulebook when you need it?

Posted by: daggar | February 28, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse
==========================================
Dagger you fail to mention that this is an uncapped year. Meaning only players of the past, players of at least two decades removed, can take part in said death match.

I believe Decon Jones would represent the Rams well, while I nominate Charles Mann, Dexter Manley, or Dave Butz. I think his head slap technique is still effective.

Posted by: clark202 | February 28, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

looks like O CAnada will win the gold.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | February 28, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Not so fast my friend. US back in it

Posted by: KingJoffeJoffer | February 28, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Next team to score will win.

Posted by: SMACK1 | February 28, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Wether Bradford, or Clausen are there at #4 or not, I hope that this new coach and front office realize football 101, and that is you can't do jack unless you can block, irregardless of what type of skilled people you have.

Obviously our dear owner Dan Snyder hasn't seemed to grasp or comprehend that simple fact, opting in the draft and free agency to go for big names, big headlines, and big jersey sales, over big talented Offensive lineman. I'm hoping the new coach and GM have convinced Snyder that is not how you build a successful football team.

Having said that, I don't think the two most highly regarded QB's in this draft Bradford or Clausen are worthy of a top five pick, there are just too many red flags and question marks concerning both, I won't go into detail because most of you already know, including the most obvious with Bradford which is his shoulder.

It may not be splashy, it might not be the biggest news flash, and it certainly isn't going to sell a lot of jerseys, but if this team is truly sincere about doing the things the right way to get this team back to respectability, draft an OT with that #4 pick. Chances are, with an improved Oline, J.Campbell(give him one more year)and the rest of the skilled O players will have a better chance to succeed.

Posted by: 72Redskins | February 28, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

What QBs are up in the FA market?? We should at least be able to find a decent backup to Our Slow But Sometimes Reliable Howitzah Campbell...Jeeziz, tomorrows March 1 !!! Start the countdown to the end of the Winter From Hell and the Ice Age!! criminy...

Posted by: frak | February 28, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

say what you want about Bradford but he's looking pretty good with the extra weight he has put on. Now he's not so fragile looking. He should be able to take the beating he will get when we draft him if we dont fix the o line

Posted by: wattsicon | February 28, 2010 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Best scenario would be to get Bradford at #4. Fall back scenario would be to get the delicate Mr. Okung who was too fragile to finish the combine drills. Major red flag there. Might betta slide the big strong tackle from Rutgers to the top of the draft board.

Posted by: coparker5 | February 28, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Nice to see someone else that makes sense.

Posted by: Redskins001 | February 28, 2010 2:54 PM |

Yea, you two are right. Skip on the delicate lineman for the even more delicate quarterback that refuses to finish the combine (ie throw a damn football, you're a phukin quarterback.) You guys need to think before you type.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 28, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

du-mass I'm mean scampbell they did think before they typed think about this the redskins doc is Andrews hummm who is bradfords doc Andrews so do u think the skins would have a little inside info about how bradfords shoulder really is do you think the scouts don't know more than all of us so I ask you do you think he's really that delicate and okung isn't delicate either just cause he tweaks a groin either It would be great to draft either one given the choice I'll take Bradford

Posted by: Superman321 | February 28, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Booooyaaaaaah!

Posted by: SMACK1 | February 28, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Score!!!!!!

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | February 28, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

the network should explain how this overtime works? shoot out? full period.. NHL rules or college?
anyone know.. ?

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | February 28, 2010 5:37 PM | Report abuse

say what you want about Bradford but he's looking pretty good with the extra weight he has put on. Now he's not so fragile looking. He should be able to take the beating he will get when we draft him if we dont fix the o line

Posted by: wattsicon | February 28, 2010 5:11 PM


So adding 13 pounds, makes him a rugged qb? Colt Brennan added weight when he came to the NFL and he still seems to be injury prone. Why would Bradford any different?

Posted by: KingJoffeJoffer | February 28, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I think they said it's the full 20, which is why we have the full Zamboni break.

Posted by: SMACK1 | February 28, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I think they said it's the full 20, which is why we have the full Zamboni break.

Posted by: SMACK1 | February 28, 2010 5:40 PM
=================================
thanks.. I missed that.. 3 kids climbing on me.
NBC should be very pleased.. In-Game Ad revenue increase.

Posted by: SkinsneedaGM | February 28, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Its sudden death

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | February 28, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Sudden death overtime. I wasn't watching -- which team won the coin toss?

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, LS, first OT gold medal game in Olympic history.

Posted by: SMACK1 | February 28, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

There really aren't any FA QBs. I'm curious to see which and how many FA o-linemen the Skins go after in FA. I won't be mad if they sign Peppers.

Posted by: coparker5 | February 28, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Dang. Good try US.

Posted by: SMACK1 | February 28, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

I guess Canada won the coin toss. Bummer. Canada was all over the US in the overtime period.

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

beep beep

Posted by: League-Source | February 28, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

These idiots better take a tackle or trade that pick for a bunch so they can beef up both lines and the dbackfield and leave this weak QB class alone. Bradford got hurt by two COLLEGE tackles; what is he gonna do when Fatboy falls on him in practice or DWare or Tuck blast him in a game?

This draft will tell me just how much the Danny's loser philosophy continues to kill this franchise.

Posted by: kahlua87 | February 28, 2010 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Your final SHARKS Olympic update

Great tournament, great finals. Love hockey!!

Final SHARKS OLYMPIC TALLY

GOLD: 6 wins, 1 loss
Joe Thornton, Patrick Marleau, Dan Boyle, Dany Heatley

SILVER: 5 wins, 1 loss
Joe Pavelski

Memories
Douglas Murray (Sweden 3-1)
Evgeni Nabakov (Russia 2-1)
Thomas Griess (Germany 0-3)

Posted by: zcezcest1 | February 28, 2010 6:35 PM | Report abuse

You wrote this to get comments, right? Any living, breathing body on the offensive line would be a good choice. However, if the draft is as rich as it is said in O-lineman, trade down and pick up 2.

Posted by: KDSmallJr | February 28, 2010 6:43 PM | Report abuse

If i were the Skins, I would be thinking QB at all in this years draft. Campbell, may or may not be the future, but I don't think Bradford or Clausen are either. And Campbell looked decent last year when his line was playing well.

IMO, the ideal offseason would include resigning our better free agents, maybe let Carlos Rogers go if they can sign someone like Dunta Robinson. If they want to try and sign Dansby, I wouldn't be against that, but don't think it's a need. What I woudl do is try to get a few legitimate starters (they don't have to be Pro-Bowl level) along the line. Then with the 4th pick, I'd take Eric Berry. That would allow Landry to move back to his more natural Safety position, where he seemed to play much much better. That would give us a great safety tandem, significantly improving our pass defense and run support. If we added Berry with Robinson form free agency, we'd have potentially the best defensive backfield in the league.

Then I'd use the second round pick on the best offensive lineman available. Then our next pick also on a lineman or possible RB. If we go with lineman, I'd go with RB in the next pick.

Posted by: segastyle | February 28, 2010 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Draft Okung @ 4 and wait to see what Seattle does @ 8. If Seattle passes on a Clausen, send JC to the Bills for their No.1 and Whitner, and select Clausen. I am also for Maurkice Pouncey if he is available in the top of the second.

Posted by: A_o_C57 | March 1, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Draft Okung @ 4 and wait to see what Seattle does @ 8. If Seattle passes on a Clausen, send JC to the Bills for their No.1 and Whitner, and select Clausen. I am also for Maurkice Pouncey if he is available in the top of the second.

Posted by: A_o_C57 | March 1, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

I think Clausen is better than Bradford anyway... 2 arm surgeries.. to risky. And Clausen worry is lack of leadership??? Campbell has lack of leadership so what's the difference. Look if the Skins get rid of Campbell and want to give Colt a shot at starter I have no problem drafting a QB in a later round. But if the ONLY way Shanahan gets rid of Campbell is if he drafts a QB at the 4th pick. Then by means draft a QB at number 4.

Posted by: sovine08 | March 1, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Draft Okung @ 4 and wait to see what Seattle does @ 8. If Seattle passes on a Clausen, send JC to the Bills for their No.1 and Whitner, and select Clausen. I am also for Maurkice Pouncey if he is available in the top of the second.
Posted by: A_o_C57
____
Nice dreaming but there is no team in the league that would give up their number 1 pick for Campbell. The rumor was the Bills trading a 3 or 4 with Whitner for Campbell and Bill fans weren't completely happy with that. IF they get a shot at Clausen why would they pass on him for Campbell???

Posted by: sovine08 | March 1, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

OK let me say this in a little simpler terms: The Skins chances of being a Superbowl team are a lot better with Jason Campbell and a GREAT offensive line than with Sam Bradford or Jimmy Clauson or even Johnny Unitas and the crap we have right now on the O line. Understand people?
Posted by: houndiedad
_____
No. Neither a crappy QB with a great OL or a great QB with a crappy OL will get the Skins to the Super Bowl. Skins need at least a good QB and a good OL. Campbell is not a good QB. Whether Clausen or Bradford are I don't know but Campbell has to be replaced if the Skins ever want to go to the Super Bowl. Look it's simple the Colts and Saint might have good OL's but the reason they were in the Super Bowl was not due to the OL but because of the QB's they have. So if say Clausen can be that guy than they have to grab him. OL? draft a tackle in the second round.. there will still be good ones there. Then get another tackle and RG in FA. Teams build around a franchise QB. Cowboys did with Aikman, Eagles did with McNabb, Giants did with Manning.. now the Skins have to do it...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 1, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company