Network News

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

In this year's draft, could Sam Bradford be the new Eli Manning?

Despite the glowing reviews Monday out of Norman, Okla., site of Sam Bradford's eagerly-anticipated Pro Day, it's probably too early to rule the Redskins out of the hunt for the talented quarterback.

Bradford seemed to have solidified himself as the draft's top pick on Monday, but it's still not a lock that the St. Louis Rams will be the team that selects him.

We've been talking with sources around the league about the draft for several weeks and two things are clear: The Redskins are very high on Bradford, and they might have to get creative in order to get him.


The top pick of the draft hasn't been traded since 2004, when San Diego shipped Eli Manning to the New York Giants. The cost was high then -- first-round pick Phillip Rivers, plus a third-rounder in 2004 and first- and fifth-round picks in 2005. You can bet that if the Rams are listening to offers for the No. 1 pick in this year's draft, the asking price will be similarly high. (The Redskins hold the No. 4 overall pick, the same one the Giants held in '04 when they traded for Manning.)

But there are certainly scenarios in which the Rams would want to listen to offers. There are some who believe Bradford might prefer to play for Washington rather than St. Louis. With the Redskins, he'd be able to sit behind Jason Campbell for a year and learn the system, he'd play for Mike Shanahan, as respected an offensive mind as any today, and offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan, who last season held the keys to the league's top-ranked passing attack. St. Louis might not hold as much long-term promise for a young quarterback.

Though next month's draft is expected to operate under the rookie salary pool, there are many who think it would be more lucrative for Bradford to play in Washington, as well.

So how could it play out? There are obviously a number of ways. If it turns out Bradford really would prefer to play for another team, he and his camp could make that known during negotiations with St. Louis, essentially refusing to sign if the Rams drafted him. This is what Manning did in 2004, prompting the trade to New York. The Rams would then have to decide whether they want someone else at No. 1 or if there's more to be obtained by trading the pick.

Of course, even if St. Louis determines that Bradford is "signable," the Rams might realize they could still get a good quarterback at No. 4 (or later) and pocket some draft picks by trading down. The Manning trade is the most recent involving the top pick and sets a precedent of sorts of four picks (including two first-rounders).

The burning question last week was, Is Bradford healthy enough to be the No. 1 pick? He apparently is, and for the next several weeks, everyone will have a new question on their minds: Does any other team want Bradford badly enough to trade up for him?

In that sense, Bradford might've won with his performance on Monday, but so did the Rams.

By Rick Maese  |  March 30, 2010; 6:45 AM ET
Categories:  NFL Draft  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Phillip Buchanon signs one-year deal with Redskins
Next: The Redskins, Shanahans and Sam Bradford might be an ideal combo

Comments

So all of this derives from the fact that the Redskins have the same pick as the Giants did in 04. I wish my job was this easy.

Posted by: bigfish360 | March 30, 2010 7:29 AM | Report abuse

I'm officially not in favor of spending additional draft picks to move up and pay additional money to procure a specific player in what could be the last "pre-Rookie-Salary-Cap" year.
#4 overall is already going to be too expensive. I would love to trade back, but don't believe it will happen.

Posted by: daggar | March 30, 2010 7:31 AM | Report abuse

No, let's pass on a QB because we don't need one. We already have the best in the league, bar none.

Rather than waste time and money trying to sign a new quarterback who might actually have some brains, skills and ability to play the position, we really ought to turn our efforts to signing JC17 to a lifetime contract at franchise player rates.

And since JC17 is around 28 or so, I am thinking about something in the 15-20 year range at around $15-20 million per season.

Trust me, at the current rate of inflation for player salaries, it will be a bargain in another 10 or 12 years -- when JC17 is finally ready to take his place among the league elite.

Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 7:38 AM | Report abuse

If you go back and look at that trade, the Giants got absolutely fleeced. No doubt the Redskins would take a similar blow to the chin if there were foolish enough to make that deal.

Although, the Giants got a SB and the Chargers didn't...if we get that result too, I could live with that...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 7:40 AM | Report abuse

"Should the Redskins make a move to get Sam Bradford with the No. 1 pick?"



No and yes.

We want the team to take linemen with the #4 and #37 picks.

But we know that ain't gonna happen.

The draft is stocked with enough linemen to where some unpolished gems types might be had in rounds 2 and 4.

M Shanahan, like most new head coaches, wants his own kid to groom.

And this isn't an anti-Jason Campbell thing, it's just what happens in the NFL.

So if you give up #4 and say, A Carter or C Cooley to get the quarterback you want, perhaps the move is painless.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 7:40 AM | Report abuse

Wow Jessica Biel just walked into my cube with no clothes on, look at that I to can fantasize Rick.

We will not trade up to get Bradford incase you guys at the post didn't get the memo Vinny doesn't work here anymore.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 30, 2010 7:42 AM | Report abuse

Flound if Jessica Biel walked into your cube naked, I'm hoping you'd have the good sense to log off of here...trust me, we'll all understand.

All I ask is that you post pics (of her, of course).

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 7:48 AM | Report abuse

#4 pick, plus next years first Jason Campbell and Andre Carter... make it happen ;)

Posted by: Veretax | March 30, 2010 7:51 AM | Report abuse

How about adding a third option, "Hell no, and what are you smoking, Rick?"
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | March 30, 2010 7:53 AM | Report abuse

The only way I'd support drafting Sam Bradford is if the Skins traded their second-round pick to Baltimore for LT Jarod Gaither. It would fill and HUGE hole and rumor has it that may be the asking price.

Posted by: stwasm | March 30, 2010 8:02 AM | Report abuse

No, to Bradford.

Posted by: westjr88 | March 30, 2010 8:04 AM | Report abuse

Have you all heard about the Raven's LT Gaither for a 2nd?

I thought Gaither was one of the better starting LTs in football. It seems kind of strange that the Ravens would trade him away... what do y'all call it? Buyer Beware?

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 8:06 AM | Report abuse

"...#4 overall is already going to be too expensive. I would love to trade back, but don't believe it will happen..."

When you lose, all of your picks are expensive as you get the top picks in any round.

So you have to ask yourself, "What price am I willing to pay to stop losing?"

Better yet, are Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan willing to make a move to get Sam Bradford?

We cite this as a Cerrato-style move, but heck, teams make draft day moves on the regular to get the specific player they want.

And the one consistent remark from the cryptic Mr. Shanahan is that he wants a quarterback to groom.

So is he willing to pay the price to get himself a guy he thinks is a winner (Tebow-Bradford-Claussen) or spend the front end of his coaching tenure tutoring up the incumbent, Jason Campbell?

I say he'll pay the price.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Yes, yes of course they're going to trade up, because there are no other holes on this team other than qb, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't make picks in some of their allotted spots, this team is just STACKED.

This ain't shanny's first rodeo, he's not an idiot. He realizes that this team as its currently constituted along the OL cannot compete.

Lets say he does trade up for Bradford, and I've said this before, isn't that basically throwing the towel in on the 2010 season, and if your JC how do you feel about that?

Sorry, that dog wont hunt..

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 8:07 AM | Report abuse

red, the word on Gaither is that he's been nicked up, and they're not sure of his dedication to his craft, from what I've read....

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 8:11 AM | Report abuse

I thought Gaither was one of the better starting LTs in football. It seems kind of strange that the Ravens would trade him away... what do y'all call it? Buyer Beware?

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 8:06 AM |

Red,

We talked about that earlier maybe they realize that having to starting LT could be to expensive. They also might think since LT seems to fall from trees in Baltimore, it will be easy to find a backup for Oher.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 30, 2010 8:11 AM | Report abuse

A trade for Bradford is highly unlikely, much to the chagrin of Vic1, et al. The FO realizes that the team needs to be built through the draft, and they can't give away a number of potential impact players that can be found in the early round picks that would surely need to be included in any trade. If Bradford is the next Peyton or Favre, then I will eat my words, but for the long term success of the team, you can't give away 3-4 starter quality picks for an unproven player.

Posted by: BigE44 | March 30, 2010 8:12 AM | Report abuse

JC17 can't feel good about anything.

Posted by: westjr88 | March 30, 2010 8:12 AM | Report abuse

If there weren't so many other needs for this team, I'd say move up and take him. But with another limited stock pile of picks this year, the uncapped year limiting talent in the FA pool... they need all the picks they can get to fill holes. They aren't in a position to give up multiple picks for one player. Although it wouldn't surprise me if they did it.

Posted by: dfbovey | March 30, 2010 8:13 AM | Report abuse

Have you all heard about the Raven's LT Gaither for a 2nd?

I thought Gaither was one of the better starting LTs in football. It seems kind of strange that the Ravens would trade him away... what do y'all call it? Buyer Beware?

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 8:06 AM |

Hard to say, I don't pay attention to the Ravens that much. Do they have someone that they think is better? And if so would he be making too much money as a backup? Other than that I would say it's a little suspect. They may know something everybody else doesn't.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 30, 2010 8:14 AM | Report abuse

Just say no to quarterbacks in the first (this year.)

Posted by: scampbell1975 | March 30, 2010 8:17 AM | Report abuse

There are three NFL DRAFT golden rules that must be followed.

1.) Don't reach based on need.
2.) Don't pass on sure things.
3.) Gamble on 4th and 1, not with #4 pick.

Here is what we know. The Skins cannot mortgage the future of their franchise on one player with concerns of any type...health, head, stamina. (We have already done that with Albert Haynesworth.) Okung is going to be a perenial pro bowler. Let someone else overpay and hopefully we can benefit (think of the draft where we ship #4 to N.O. and get picks that got us Champ Bailey, Chris Samuels and several other players). Go Skins.

Posted by: donsilvester | March 30, 2010 8:17 AM | Report abuse

It's funny that when Shanahan speaks of grooming a quarterback everyone assumes that has to be a first round pick. I think he goes with a QB in the second or fourth round and does not make a move for the number 1 pick from the rams. As we have seen, the Redskins now have a plan in place and it looks like they are slowly building things. Why everyone thinks this all will be done in a single year is beyond me...relax, let them build this thing the right way. That does not include committing a bunch of picks this year and/or future picks for a QB

Posted by: hemlock28 | March 30, 2010 8:17 AM | Report abuse

this team definitely does not need to mortgage its future anymore to trade up and draft a qb that may or may not be the second coming of any of the three mannings

just take okung, if hes not there, trade down or take the next best option (williams, bulaga)

dont send the second round pick for gaither...keep it and draft a lineman (2 yrs younger and cheaper)...a RT or G/C

Posted by: AhsanFamily | March 30, 2010 8:18 AM | Report abuse

Work ethic concerns with Gaither?

Oh okay -- pass.

They need players who are going to put in the work.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Okung is going to be a perenial pro bowler. Let someone else overpay and hopefully we can benefit (think of the draft where we ship #4 to N.O. and get picks that got us Champ Bailey, Chris Samuels and several other players). Go Skins.

Posted by: donsilvester | March 30, 2010 8:17 AM |

He maybe that but it will probably be for the Lions, you can't set your sites on a player who most likely wont be there.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 30, 2010 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Every new coach is going to want to find "their guy". Norv got Brad Johnson and Snyder wanted Jeff George. We all know who won that pissing match and how it turned out. Spurrier brought in Shane Matthews, Danny Wuerfell and drafted Ramsey. We all know how THAT worked out. Gibbs came in and traded up to get Campbell, which I thought was a bad idea then but trusted Gibbs. So that leaves us here. Shanahan is going to get somebody sometime, to be his boy. It won't be Campbell, you can believe that. He may be resigned however to starting Campbell this year in order to position himself better for next year.

Posted by: westjr88 | March 30, 2010 8:23 AM | Report abuse

Put me in the "If they drafted Bradford/Suh/McCoy/Okung/Spiller/Berry or traded down and got more picks, I'd be okay with it" category.

No Clausen.
No reaches peroid.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 8:25 AM | Report abuse

Okung if he's there, and I've stated that if Suh is there I'd be ok with it as well. I'm starting to get ok with Baluga(sp) as well...

However, trading back, and then trading back again, needs to be the priority....

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 8:28 AM | Report abuse

Have you all heard about the Raven's LT Gaither for a 2nd?

I thought Gaither was one of the better starting LTs in football. It seems kind of strange that the Ravens would trade him away... what do y'all call it? Buyer Beware?

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 8:06 AM


We touched on this in the last thread, Red...I'm skeptical of any player a team is actively shopping. If he's the answer to prayer at LT, then the Ravens wouldn't be looking to unload him.

If they take our 4th rounder, I'd jump on it. But at #37, we could draft our own (hopefully better) version of Gaither and not take the Ravens nicked up version 1.0.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 8:29 AM | Report abuse

beantowngreg

"Let's say he does trade up for Bradford, and I've said this before, isn't that basically throwing the towel in on the 2010 season...'


I'm a realistic redskin fan.

Some of the cats in RI think the team just adds, "OKUNG!!" and we're in the playoffs.

It's abit more complex than that.

And truth be told, even if we take tackles in rounds 1 and 2, it might still equal a bottom finish in the NFC East.

So does drafting a quarterback mean we're throwing in the towel: no.

It just means we're addressing a position of need for the future.

And say what you will about Jason Campbell, but he's not the future.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 8:30 AM | Report abuse

Agreed Greg...this draft appears to be one where you can get quality in quantity and we need to be in on that. I would LOVE to see Suh slide to #4 and someone fall in love with him to the point that they'll give us a clusterf*ck of picks for the right to draft him.

Oh but a guy can dream...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 8:35 AM | Report abuse

... or Tim Couch.

Posted by: Alan4 | March 30, 2010 8:36 AM | Report abuse

moe, I respect your opinion, but politely disagree. Draft a LT, and draft a RT, with their #1, and #2. And now that they have a real, a REAL NFL coach, and not a wanna be NFL coach. You get the line in place, you get the WR's coached up, you get the running game working...

At this point in time, get the OL in place, and dance with who you brung...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Moe, you make a solid point there but failing to address the O-line (our biggest weakness AND deepest position in this draft) this year sets this team back in the rebuilding process. It seems backward to get a QB this year and address the O-line next year when the drafts this year and next year will be better for O-line and QBs, respectively. I don't think this is a playoff contender in 2010, but the chances of overachieving and becoming one anyway increases exponentially if the line comes together and actually plays pretty well. The only way that happens is if we get a couple of stud rookies in the draft NOW.

But agree with the spirit of what you're saying.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Have you all heard about the Raven's LT Gaither for a 2nd?

I thought Gaither was one of the better starting LTs in football. It seems kind of strange that the Ravens would trade him away... what do y'all call it? Buyer Beware?

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 8:06 AM

From what I've been reading, Gaither's work ethic is in question. There is a question regarding his durability or pain tolerance. Then there is his expected salary demands. You put all that together, and you get a talented GM trying to unload a player that in all likelihood he will release in the next year or two. However, Gaither will be an improvement over any current Redskins' OT.

Posted by: TWISI | March 30, 2010 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: westjr88 | March 30, 2010 8:23 AM

Very cogent analysis... and a good summary of why this team has had such difficulty moving forward: too much turnover at HC, as well as QB. This team probably could have won with any of those QBs given time and if the other parts of the team woud have been addressed better.

Posted by: Alan4 | March 30, 2010 8:44 AM | Report abuse

bean,

We are not in disagreement:

We want the team to take linemen with the #4 and #37 picks.

But we know that ain't gonna happen.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 7:40 AM


No one is endorsing the idea that the team should take Bradford/Claussen.

But there is the fact that Shanahan has said he wants a young q-back to groom.

(And whereas the rams won't pay Bradford what he wants, Dan Snyder would love to.)

All new head coaches want their own guy under center.

And that's the truth, I say go out and get the best guy, that's all.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Giants traded No 4 pick phill rivers 98.5 QBR for Eli Manning 79.2 QBR

Good Move there...

Posted by: alex35332 | March 30, 2010 8:47 AM | Report abuse

No, let's pass on a QB because we don't need one. We already have the best in the league, bar none.

Rather than waste time and money trying to sign a new quarterback who might actually have some brains, skills and ability to play the position, we really ought to turn our efforts to signing JC17 to a lifetime contract at franchise player rates.

And since JC17 is around 28 or so, I am thinking about something in the 15-20 year range at around $15-20 million per season.

Trust me, at the current rate of inflation for player salaries, it will be a bargain in another 10 or 12 years -- when JC17 is finally ready to take his place among the league elite.

Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 7:38 AM | Report abuse

lol. keep beating that hate drum man, everything you post is about him. I'll bet you love the guy.

Posted by: Bigfoot_has_a_posse | March 30, 2010 8:52 AM | Report abuse

I'm a realistic redskin fan.

Some of the cats in RI think the team just adds, "OKUNG!!" and we're in the playoffs.

It's abit more complex than that.

And truth be told, even if we take tackles in rounds 1 and 2, it might still equal a bottom finish in the NFC East.

So does drafting a quarterback mean we're throwing in the towel: no.

It just means we're addressing a position of need for the future.

And say what you will about Jason Campbell, but he's not the future.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 8:30 AM | Report abuse

hey mistamoe, i dont think anyone is saying that if we get okung, all our problems are gone and were goin to the playoffs

were just saying it fills the biggest needs on our team for the past few years...campbell (whether you love him or hate him) is serviceable and can hold down the fort...the biggest need for the future at this point in time is o-line, not qb

Posted by: AhsanFamily | March 30, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

moe, I'm not sure about that, I'm not sure that Shanny who claims to have watched lots of film from the 2009 season, doesn't see the OBVIOUS need right in front of him. He can't have watched JC getting planted into the turf over, and over, and over, and watch the RB's making moves in the backfield, and come away thinking that QB is the way to go....to me, that just defies logic...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

I'm a realistic redskin fan.

Some of the cats in RI think the team just adds, "OKUNG!!" and we're in the playoffs.

It's abit more complex than that.

And truth be told, even if we take tackles in rounds 1 and 2, it might still equal a bottom finish in the NFC East.

So does drafting a quarterback mean we're throwing in the towel: no.

It just means we're addressing a position of need for the future.

And say what you will about Jason Campbell, but he's not the future.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 8:30 AM | Report abuse

hey mistamoe, i dont think anyone is saying that if we get okung, all our problems are gone and were goin to the playoffs

were just saying it fills the biggest needs on our team for the past few years...campbell (whether you love him or hate him) is serviceable and can hold down the fort...the biggest need for the future at this point in time is o-line, not qb

Posted by: AhsanFamily | March 30, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Exactly, Alex. The Chargers got the better QB AND got Pro-Bowlers Shawne Merriman and Nate Kaeding with the extra picks. A.J. Smith straight stole from NYG without a ski-mask...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 8:54 AM | Report abuse

Yeh. I prefer a better value at QB. Taking an early 1st round QB almost guarantees you'll be paying too much for him up front. Even if he does pan out, he'll be a big drain on your capspace unless you manage to get him to deal towards the end of his contract. And there's little chance of that with an early first rounder, again.

If you get a guy later in the first or in the second, you're going to have less of a gamble. And sometimes a better payout.

I do like that we're talking to everyone. It throws those tracking our picks off the scent.

Posted by: DikShuttle | March 30, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

brownwood

"The Chargers got the better QB AND got Pro-Bowlers Shawne Merriman and Nate Kaeding with the extra picks. A.J. Smith straight stole from NYG without a ski-mask..."


But the New York Football Giants got the ring, and until Philip Rivers gets his, I'd say the jints came out on top of that deal.

It's about rings--always.

And Eli has one.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 8:58 AM | Report abuse

Exactly, Alex. The Chargers got the better QB AND got Pro-Bowlers Shawne Merriman and Nate Kaeding with the extra picks. A.J. Smith straight stole from NYG without a ski-mask...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 8:54 AM |

Yes and when the get rid of Norv they might finally win a SB.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 30, 2010 8:59 AM | Report abuse

Exactly, Alex. The Chargers got the better QB AND got Pro-Bowlers Shawne Merriman and Nate Kaeding with the extra picks. A.J. Smith straight stole from NYG without a ski-mask...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 8:54 AM | Report abuse

I have never been a fan of teams making a trade involving more than 1 seasons draft picks, if the move is a bust you have to re-live that sting for 2 seasons over 1. Like the skins are with the Jason Taylor trade.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 30, 2010 9:00 AM | Report abuse

hmmm... looking for that Chargers StuporBowel trophy here.. somewhere... hmmm. where is it?!

... Eli was the worse QB? mebbe by the 'numbers' - but he's got that ring...

Who would you rather have? TrentD/EliM with the ring or DanM/JimK withOUT it?

Posted by: DikShuttle | March 30, 2010 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Don't know why fixing the line and getting a serviceable quarterback is considered to be an "either/or" proposition. Is it really so difficult to do both?

Why are the Redskins paying all of that high-priced front office talent if they can’t find a way to fix more than one position at a time?

Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 9:05 AM | Report abuse

"...failing to address the O-line (our biggest weakness AND deepest position in this draft) this year sets this team back in the rebuilding process..."

We have picks in rounds 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7.

The draft is offenive linemen deep.

The word is that there will be a lot of undrafted types that would normally be picks in rounds 5, 6, and 7.

This means there are tons 'o linemen prospects to be had.

So let's chill with the idea that somehow not taking a guy at #4 condemns the 'rebuilding process'.

The team will find two strong young offensive linemen fron this draft.

BOOK IT!!!

(Legal disclaimer: the phrase "Book it!" is used with the assumed okay of 4thfloor)

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

But the New York Football Giants got the ring, and until Philip Rivers gets his, I'd say the jints came out on top of that deal.

It's about rings--always.

And Eli has one.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 8:58 AM | Report abuse

I think the jint would be better with Rivers, & probably have a ring too.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 30, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

JC17 can't feel good about anything.

Posted by: westjr88

especially his won loss record.

Who are some of these obscure O linemen that have been signed? I think Shanahan has an idea he can get some of the old guys and some of the signees to handle the line duties. Yes, a LT is needed desperately too.

In summary, I trust BA and MS until proven otherwise regardless of who they draft. Let them build the team the way they want and realize it is a multi-year proposition.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | March 30, 2010 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Don't know why fixing the line and getting a serviceable quarterback is considered to be an "either/or" proposition. Is it really so difficult to do both?

Why are the Redskins paying all of that high-priced front office talent if they can’t find a way to fix more than one position at a time?

Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 9:05 AM


Dude, change your name from "Vic" to "Vinny"...you can't fix this team in one offseason. And trying to do so only sets this team back. If you can't get that on your own, there's nothing anyone up here can tell you to make you see it.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

No, let's pass on a QB because we don't need one. We already have the best in the league, bar none.

Rather than waste time and money trying to sign a new quarterback who might actually have some brains, skills and ability to play the position, we really ought to turn our efforts to signing JC17 to a lifetime contract at franchise player rates.

And since JC17 is around 28 or so, I am thinking about something in the 15-20 year range at around $15-20 million per season.

Trust me, at the current rate of inflation for player salaries, it will be a bargain in another 10 or 12 years -- when JC17 is finally ready to take his place among the league elite.

Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 7:38 AM | Report abuse
__________

People like you give the impression that JC is the worst QB ever. I just don't understand the hatred for him. Is he the best QB out there? No, but he's actually pretty decent. It could be a whole lot worse. Don't you remember Heath Shuler? How about Danny Wurffel? Now that was truly bad quarterbacking. Look at what other teams have to suffer with right now, and you'll see that the Redskins are in way better shape than some others. JC is an average to slightly above average QB, and I'll take that for now. Fix the other issues, and the Skins can win with him. Have you ever played football? A QB by himself can't win a game. You can't win without alot of talented guys all over the field, and the Redskins are missing alot of those pieces right now. I'm no JC apologist, but I get really tired of reading the same hate-speak for this guy day after day when it's not warranted. Sorry to pick on you individually; my rant here is really directed more generally to everyone.

Posted by: skinsfan713 | March 30, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

"Who would you rather have? TrentD/EliM with the ring or DanM/JimK withOUT it?"

Easy choice there: rings.

I bet there's a longer list of average q-backs with rings than HOF'rs without.

I want a guy who plays well enough to lift everyone around him so the team wins a ring.

One guy loading up stats don't mean, sh!t.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Again...folks up here are celebrating mediocre QB play simply because it's got a ring attached. I don't care if Eli has 4 rings and Rivers has none...Rivers is the better QB. Eli throwing a miracle completion in the middle of the field on a play that should have been blown dead and riding shotgun on the coattails of one of the greatest defensive efforts in SB history does NOT make him better than Philip Rivers, who I believe has the same number of playoff wins that Eli has. We're talking about the merits of the deal based on who got what. Just because the Giants overcame getting fleeced, doesn't erase the fact that they got fleeced.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 9:14 AM | Report abuse

If I have a choice between watching a new potential rising star who could generate some excitement or a slow witted, slow-footed, proven loser, I'll take the new guy. Nothing will change with this team with Campbell as the QB.

Posted by: theBozyn1 | March 30, 2010 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 7:38 AM

Never get tired of beating your own drum, do you?

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 30, 2010 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Eli Manning, John Elway….what those two did around being drafted sucks. To say that you won’t play for the team that drafts you is such complete BS that I can’t stand it. They are essentially saying that they are too awesome to play for your crappy franchise. Biggest dick moves ever, IMO. Unfortunately they both have rings, and one of them is a “legend”. I hope Bradford isn’t like these guys. Everyone else goes to the team that picks them, what makes these guys above the rules? I would love for him to fall to the skins, but not if because he simply refuses to play for the rams because he thinks they suck, or that he can get better marketing deals in DC or NY……and I would definitely not want them to give up anything more than the #4 pick to get him.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | March 30, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

I think someone made this comment already, but it bears repeating; I think Shanallen is going lineman with #4 and Tebow with #37, assuming no one has reached on him by then.

Tebow might be the guy to groom for Shanny. Think about it- left handed, athletic, scrambler. Granted, the arm is not anywhere as good, but...

Posted by: LarryBud | March 30, 2010 9:18 AM | Report abuse

Yes and when the get rid of Norv they might finally win a SB.

Posted by: Flounder21 | March 30, 2010 8:59 AM


Now way dude...that window is closed. Gates is getting old, LT is gone (literally and figuratively), and Merriman is on the way out. I still think they would have had a better shot at a title with Marty than they ever did with Norv at the helm. That guy is physically incapable of doing anything but underachieve.

Yet some idiot talking head on ESPN will continue to bet the farm on the Chargers going to the SB. Some things never change...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 9:19 AM | Report abuse

"The cost was high then -- first-round pick Phillip Rivers, plus a third-rounder in 2004 and first- and fifth-round picks in 2005."

- MistaMayor


Actually, sir, Phillip Rivers was a second round draft pick.

Posted by: Alan4 | March 30, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

I bet there's a longer list of average q-backs with rings than HOF'rs without.

I want a guy who plays well enough to lift everyone around him so the team wins a ring.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 9:12 AM |

This is contradictory. And Moe, you know better.

You can't call a guy "average" in one sentence and then in the next say he plays "well enough to lift everyone around him"... as if that is some gift that only AVERAGE QBs possess and HOF's don't.

The reason Marino, Kelly, etc. didn't win a ring is because the other 52 guys on their team weren't good enough to win one with them.

You're telling me Marino/Kelly couldn't have won a ring with Baltimore in 2000? TB in 2002? NYG in 2007?

In football, there are way too many moving parts to pin it all on the QB and say he wasn't "good enough" to lift his whole team. Pretty sure that QB's don't play defense too...

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 30, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

In Shanahallen we trust, i.e., whatever. This is the stuff these guys are supposedly good at and get paid to do.

That said, I'd be down with this possibility that Jasno suggests -- Gaither for the second round pick.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2010/03/29/la-canfora-barber-gaither-could-be-available/

Its bird in hand v. two in bush thing. Gaither is a known. Guys leaving college are unknowns.

So let it be written. So let it be done.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

So let's chill with the idea that somehow not taking a guy at #4 condemns the 'rebuilding process'.

The team will find two strong young offensive linemen fron this draft.

BOOK IT!!!

(Legal disclaimer: the phrase "Book it!" is used with the assumed okay of 4thfloor)

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

The issue is, those guys in Rd 5-7 are developmental prospects. The Skins need starters from day one. They better get a tackle early in this draft, or they will be rehashing last year. That is hoping a quality LT will drop from the sky like manna sometime during training camp. How did that work out?

Posted by: TWISI | March 30, 2010 9:23 AM | Report abuse

I think someone made this comment already, but it bears repeating; I think Shanallen is going lineman with #4 and Tebow with #37, assuming no one has reached on him by then.

Tebow might be the guy to groom for Shanny. Think about it- left handed, athletic, scrambler. Granted, the arm is not anywhere as good, but...

Posted by: LarryBud | March 30, 2010 9:18 AM


Sounds like Tebow will go somewhere in the mid-to-late 1st round, so it looks like that decision will be taken out of our hands.

Thank God...

(pun intended)

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Don't know why fixing the line and getting a serviceable quarterback is considered to be an "either/or" proposition

Its not, its just a matter of quality. Would you rather a 1st round LT, and a 2nd round RT, or a 2nd round LT, and a 4th round RT??

Me, I'm taking the quality 10/10 times.

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

I want a guy who plays well enough to lift everyone around him so the team wins a ring.

One guy loading up stats don't mean, sh!t.


Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 9:12 AM

I'm surprised at you, Moe! I can't believe you're taking the Vinny-esqu posture that a QB is going to "lift" the franchise!

Jay Cutler has never had a single winning season as a starting QB. Does he fail your test?

Brad Johnson earned a ring (after leaving the Skins for Tampa Bay). Is he the type of guy you're looking for?

Phillip Rivers is one of the best QBs in the NFL, and he hasn't sniffed a ring. But Trent Dilfer has one.

This team needs to be rebuilt from the ground up, and no QB can really succeed as it's currently constructed. The past 2 decades bears me out on this.

Posted by: Alan4 | March 30, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, I'll keep beating the drum... because I am tired of losing.

Witness the past season's division champions... playoff winners... conference champions... and Superbowl winners. There wasn't weak or mediocre starting quarterback among any of them.

Or recall the series of games the Washington Redskins played against our other division foes. How many times were Redskins outright embarrassed by the play of our offensive unit?

Call it hatred if you like...

because yeah, I hate mediocre play...

and yeah, I hate to lose.

Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

I would love to trade back, but don't believe it will happen.

Posted by: daggar | March 30, 2010 7:31 AM | Report abuse


I think Bruce Allen and his salary cap savy might make him see that he can get much more value by trading down this year and signing players at a lower premium now and waiting to see if the rookie salary cap takes place next year. He'd be getting much more for his dollar. And like I said before, they know this year isn't their year to win. I believe they're positioning themselves for years 4-5

Posted by: Devo2 | March 30, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

The few average QB's that won the SB had amazing Defenses to stifle the opposition and they are more rare than a jackalope. To point to the extreme minority of cases where an average QB won is well, myopic.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | March 30, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

There wasn't weak or mediocre starting quarterback among any of them.


Its not hatred vic, its more like ignorance, to be honest. Games are won and lost in the trenches. PERIOD. You can spew all the crap you want, but that is an undeniable fact. See the Giants beating the Pats, why? Because they had better DL play, than the pats had OL play.

Brad Johnson
Trent Dilfer

Come with something new, expand your horizons a little...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Marino and Kelly went to superbowls & had the talent. That's a ridiculous argument.

If it were just about talent, they wouldn't play the games.

I'm just asking you what you'd rather have: A ring with an admittedly flawed QB, or a Hall-of-Famer and no ring. I'll take Mark Rypen over Jim Kelly. 'Cause he brought me a ring.


...and I'm not even a 'ring' guy. I'm a 'win the division & beat the stuffing outta Dallas' guy.

Posted by: DikShuttle | March 30, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

If you want to win with JC as your QB, then you had better build a much better D.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | March 30, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

A franchise QB can cover many holes, look at the Colts, that team would be plain average, if it weren't for Payton Manning!

what part don't you guys understand it doesn't take 1 year to build a line; and drafting Bradford doesn't mean he has to start right away, he can even sit for 2-3 yrs (very likely two yrs) behind Campbell or who ever is there, and learn from a high profile coach like Shannahan is the best scenario to develop Bradford; not to mention Kyle Shannahan a football yunkie who loves football, and from what I hear is very creative with his offensive plays, I think will get along just fine w/ Bradford.

Bradford just not any QB, what catches me is that this guy is smart when he plays football, is not just about making nice throws, anyone can make nice throws, (even Jamarcus Russell, lol) but this kids IQ and quick decision making from what I hear is up there and what separtes him from the rest; many say he is Payton Manning like, with his decision making, smartes when he is on the pocket, apart from the effective throws.

forget about the injury, technology is much more advance, they have attached that shoulder and is there to stay! he has gotten bigger, went from 225 to 236, he is a big guy 6'5, while he sits in the next couple years he'll get stronger in the weight room!

we haven't had a top 5 draft pick in years, this the meant to be, its time to get our franchise QB; I know many of you will think that if we make give up picks etc, were back to the Cerrato era, I will disagree with that, there will always be crazy moves like that; but coming from a credible coach like Shannahan, I wouldn't question him much and give him a chance to do his thing and support him.

Cooley, Carter, this year 1st round pick and next years! Gotta make it happen, we already know what Cambpell can do, at best a serviceable QB! thats it! lets not kidd ourselves!

Posted by: slvtruco21 | March 30, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Actually, sir, Phillip Rivers was a second round draft pick.

Posted by: Alan4 | March 30, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse
________

Actually, sir, Phillip Rivers was the fourth overall pick of the 1st round.

Posted by: skinsfan713 | March 30, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

because yeah, I hate mediocre play...

and yeah, I hate to lose.

Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 9:31


You'd think you'd be used to it after 17 years...just sayin'...

But what separates you from the frustrated lot of us, is that most of us here know that the Redskins failings over the years is hung squarely on the shoulders of Dan Snyder and his horrendous front office structure. You're not that bad/mediocre for that long unless the operation is damned from the top down. Hanging this team's "mediocre play" on one player is shortsighted at best. And your irrational hate for JC makes me think your problem is way beyond shortsightedness.

So when I hear you call out any other players deserving of the blame for this team's mediocrity, you'll get let off the hook. But harping on JC like it's all his fault is just plain stupid.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

The few average QB's that won the SB had amazing Defenses to stifle the opposition and they are more rare than a jackalope. To point to the extreme minority of cases where an average QB won is well, myopic.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | March 30, 2010 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Eli Manning average to above average, finally getting good now, before him lets just say Brad Johnson, average had a few above average years, before him lets go Baltimore and Trent who was truly average. Lets not mention the fact that the Steelers won both there SB's on the backs of the D. Big Ben is a good QB sure, though by no means a QB God like BBM or Tommyboy.

So we can say 3-5 of the last Decade's superbowls won on the backs of the defense. But yes sure, last season we finally saw the top 2 QB's in the league go head to head.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 30, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

"Cooley, Carter, this year 1st round pick and next years!"

So, essentially you want to gut the te depth, give up2 first rounders, and Carter for 1 guy.....That you don't want to play for 2-3 years?? Was this serious, I mean you wrote a lot, did you read it before you posted it.....

I mean, thats Vinny at his finest. Now if you can get a 2nd for betts, then you're hired........

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

News Flash: We're not winning jack shti this year so it doesn't matter who the QB is. This team is rebuilding.

Listen to Shanahan and Allen talk. All they've said this offseason is how the have a plan and they're going to stick to the plan. That's GM speak for 'We're going suck this year.'

They know it. Why don't we?

Posted by: Original_etrod | March 30, 2010 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Greg, let's throw in Haynesworth to seal the deal...they won't be able to refuse that!

Posted by: dlhaze1 | March 30, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

I'm just asking you what you'd rather have: A ring with an admittedly flawed QB, or a Hall-of-Famer and no ring. I'll take Mark Rypen over Jim Kelly. 'Cause he brought me a ring.

Posted by: DikShuttle | March 30, 2010 9:38 AM


If only it were that simple...

QB is obviously a very important position on a football team. But it's not the ONLY position. You can have a great QB and lose. You can have a mediocre QB and win. Just like you can have a sh*tty running game and win (Indy) and have a great ground game and lose (Seahawks). Winning a SB is so dependent on a variety of different things coming together at once and there's no one way to do it or sure-fire way to pull it off.

Point is, it's stupid to think that simply getting an elite QB will put you in the SB. If it were that easy, Marino and Peyton would have a bunch of rings and clowns like Eli and Trent Dilfer would have none.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 9:51 AM | Report abuse

alex,

BB is so much better than JC it's not even close. Again, there are a few examples of average QB's winning, but they had tremendous defenses. Skins do not, but could.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | March 30, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Hey, I grew up about twenty minutes from there in a little town called Millsboro. BB is nice but real quiet this time of year.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | March 30, 2010 6:59 AM | Report abuse

Ha, my folks retired there a couple years ago, headed there this Easter for the weekend.

Posted by: RomoShortball | March 30, 2010 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: DikShuttle | March 30, 2010 9:38 AM

That's specious reasoning. I'd love to know the winners of the next 10 Super Bowls for gambling purposes... can you provide me with those too?

If you're asking me as a fan if I'd rather win a ring or not win a ring.. of course I would rather win a ring with an average QB and be terrible for 10 years than to not win one and just be very good with a great QB for 10 years.

But having a better QB for the long haul puts you in a better position and gives you more opportunities to win rings year after year.

If there was a draft tomorrow, and you could take Mark Rypien or Jim Kelly based on talent, only a fool would take Rypien first. But yeah, he happened to win a ring.

And George Mason made the Final Four. And Giacamo won the Kentucky Derby. And Douglass beat Tyson. Upsets happen in sports, thats why sports is great.

But year after year, the Kansases and the Rachel Alexandras and the Holyfields are going to be the ones you want in your corner.

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 30, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

dl, you're showing you're inexperience. Betts for a second is a sound move, and should happen, however throwing in haynesworth, is just giving up too much. We should be able to get 3-4 picks for AH, 2 at least in the first round.

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

alex,

BB is so much better than JC it's not even close. Again, there are a few examples of average QB's winning, but they had tremendous defenses. Skins do not, but could.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | March 30, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

I am not saying, nor did I say that Ben is equal to JC. I was pointing out that BB has been to 2 SB and both times his WRs got the MVP, and both were won on the backs of the defense. In his first superbowl his QBR was in the 20's.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 30, 2010 9:59 AM | Report abuse

If Bradford is there at #4 no one could blame the skins for drafting him but trading up to get him is stupid! We would most likely loose another pick to do so. We would be bettter off drafting Okung or the best tackle available and trying to get Dan Lefevour or another lesser known qb in the second round long as it's not Tim Tebust

Posted by: hondaman579 | March 30, 2010 9:59 AM | Report abuse

If Bradford is there at #4 no one could blame the skins for drafting him but trading up to get him is stupid! We would most likely loose another pick to do so. We would be bettter off drafting Okung or the best tackle available and trying to get Dan Lefevour or another lesser known qb in the second round long as it's not Tim Tebust

Posted by: hondaman579 | March 30, 2010 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Jeff Hostetler, Jeff George, John Friez, Rich Gannon, Tony Banks, Cary Conklin, Gus Frerotte, Trent Green,Heath Shuler, Brad Johnson, Patrick Ramsey, Shane Matthews, Danny Wuerffel, Tim Hasselbeck, Mark Brunell, Todd Collins and Jason Campbell.....all starting QB's, in no particular order, who have started since our last Super Bowl. That's 18 yrs. In the 18 yrs prior to that, Sonny Jurgensen, Billy Kilmer, Joe Theismann, Jay Schroeder, Ed Ruppert(strike), Doug Williams, Stan Humphries, Jeff Rutledge and Mark Rypien.

Kind of a lopsided list, especially when 3 of the QB's on list #2 have rings and 1 other actually played in another.

Posted by: westjr88 | March 30, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

That's why I want a good quarterback at a reasonable price. I don't want to chance it on some high pick who most likely won't pan out.

I'd rather build a good team than sacrifice it for a big dollar baby.

Posted by: DikShuttle | March 30, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Wow...one of the "2 Live Stews" on ESPN First Take just took a page out of the "Emmitt Smiff Ebonics Dictionary" and said that Michael Vick is "just getting out of the penile system". Typical ESPN garbage. I can't make this stuff up...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:06 AM | Report abuse

I just want to see competitive football. Campbell isn't a competitive quarterback and never will be. The Skins shouldn't sell-out to get Bradford. I was hoping he'd slide to us at #4 but if he is off the board, Shanny should take Clausen.

Posted by: coparker5 | March 30, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

listening to sirius radio this morning and gil brandt, one of the smartest men in the sport, compared him to aikman and said when he was with the cowturds some in the org wanted manderich over aikman, but he and jimmie agreed you couldn't pass on talent like aikman's. I would love okung in first and lefevour in second but trust shanallen over my football wisdom. for what its worth, brandt gives the skins a 49% chance of landing bradford.

Posted by: hcic55 | March 30, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

That's why I want a good quarterback at a reasonable price. I don't want to chance it on some high pick who most likely won't pan out.

I'd rather build a good team than sacrifice it for a big dollar baby.

Posted by: DikShuttle | March 30, 2010 10:03 AM

Amen to that.

For every overrated Manning going #1 overall, there's a Dan Marino going in the end of the 1st round. There's a Tom Brady in the 6th round. There's a Joe Montana in the 3rd. Franchise QBs are built, not born.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

So does drafting a quarterback mean we're throwing in the towel: no.

It just means we're addressing a position of need for the future.

And say what you will about Jason Campbell, but he's not the future.

Posted by: MistaMoe | March 30, 2010 8:30 AM


You are a minority here, so your opinion doesn't count. Look at the poll for confirmation and stop crying.

Posted by: abxinc | March 30, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

The article leaves out one crucial result of that trade... Rivers is a better player. Eli's good, but Rivers is better. Chargers got the best of it by far.

I want a left tackle so badly, but I must say - look up the highlight reels on you tube - Clausen looks a lot like Mark Sanchez, and he plays a lot like Matt Ryan. I don't think I'd freak out at all if they took him at #4.

Posted by: bigfoot1 | March 30, 2010 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Did you read the article where it kind of illustrated you what the Giants gave up in 2004 for Manning? type of trading we may be required give?

first-round pick Phillip Rivers,
third-rounder in 2004
first- and fifth-round picks in 2005

I don't think my trade scenario is that crazy; I know your mentioning the depth factor, but lets face it, Davis showed a lot last year and will only get better; 6 TD in 11 games.... remember 2008, when Cooley despite the many yards he got us, only managed to score 1 TD all year, 16 15 games played; not taking anything away from Cooley, he is a beast, but we cannot get too attached to players anymore, the skins culture has to change, and while Cooley has value to improve us in the long run, he has to go, and sacrifices have to be made, even if we have to sacrifice picks the first couple of years to get franchise QB!

Heck, its been 18 years going no where, we have the chance to get a smart franchise QB in Bradford, why not take a chance; we really have nothing to loose, and much to gain.

Posted by: slvtruco21 | March 30, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

For every overrated Manning going #1 overall, there's a Dan Marino going in the end of the 1st round. There's a Tom Brady in the 6th round. There's a Joe Montana in the 3rd. Franchise QBs are built, not born.

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

It was probably much easier I think back in the day to figure out what a guy could do in the pro's based off what he did in college. I mean, you had fewer "system" teams in college back in the 80's than you do now. Its why I will always be in favor of a developmental league for the NFL.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 30, 2010 10:14 AM | Report abuse

If you go back and look at that trade, the Giants got absolutely fleeced. No doubt the Redskins would take a similar blow to the chin if there were foolish enough to make that deal.

Although, the Giants got a SB and the Chargers didn't...if we get that result too, I could live with that...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 7:40

You forgot to end this one with "Never mind."

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

They need players who are going to put in the work.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 8:19 AM |

How would a herb like you know anything about work with all the fronting and cosigning you do on this blog? Heh, heh.

Posted by: ElDrano | March 30, 2010 10:16 AM | Report abuse

amen, Brownie!

Posted by: DikShuttle | March 30, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

... The issue is, those guys in Rd 5-7 are developmental prospects. The Skins need starters from day one. ...

Posted by: TWISI | March 30, 2010 9:23 AM

Making the roster in the NFL means that you should be ready to be a starter (note: I did not say that you SHOULD be a starter). Once they have 53 guys, the guys who end up as starters will necessarily have to step up their game. If someone gets hurt, then next guy on the depth chart steps up. I know I'm not lighting any new lightbulbs here, but undrafted guys and/or formerly depth guys come out of nowhere to shine all the time. Its all about opportunity and preparation (someone said that was what luck was). In Shanahallen we trust (for this next season anyway).

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Bradford will be a good QB, maybe even a great one... that said, the Redskins are not in a position to give up additional picks...there are simply too many holes on this roster (I believe QB is not one of them). Not to mention in all this Eli talk, you failed to mention that by most measures Philip Rivers is the better QB... so the Giants gave up a ton for a slightly worse QB. My advise to the Skins is slow and steady wins the race...fix the O-line then if JC doesn't perform look for a QB in future drafts/free agent classes/trades.

Posted by: cedric_lockhart | March 30, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Wow...one of the "2 Live Stews" on ESPN First Take just took a page out of the "Emmitt Smiff Ebonics Dictionary" and said that Michael Vick is "just getting out of the penile system". Typical ESPN garbage. I can't make this stuff up...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:06 AM |

But you can make up butthead posts like this.

Posted by: ElDrano | March 30, 2010 10:18 AM | Report abuse

But the New York Football Giants got the ring, and until Philip Rivers gets his, I'd say the jints came out on top of that deal.

It's about rings--always.

And Eli has one.

Posted by: MistaMoe
-----------------
I'd say the Chargers got the curse of Norv... The Great Demotivator strikes again!

Posted by: closer44 | March 30, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Listen to Shanahan and Allen talk. All they've said this offseason is how the have a plan and they're going to stick to the plan. That's GM speak for 'We're going suck this year.'

They know it. Why don't we?

Posted by: Original_etrod | March 30, 2010 9:47 AM

etrod, hard words hurt. We're working through these issues up here. The stages of grief are shock, denial, anger, and acceptance. Peeps up here just need to wait for the patient to die first. Then we can hug it out, b!tch.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse

For anyone who's seen Sam Bradford play over a period of time, this guy is tremendously talented, and has Dan Marino type of play making ability. He'd be worth a high price if it weren't for the fact that he seems to get himself seriously injured just when he seems to be one step away from greatness. He did that twice at Oklahoma. What would happen at the pro level to Sam Bradford after he inevitably gets popped from even better and faster athletes?

How durable is this guy and can he keep from getting into serious injury trouble in future? I think that's the question we should all be asking ourselves, not if he's somehow managed to heal after a prolonged period of time.

Posted by: driverdesign | March 30, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I'm ready to stake my predictions for next year ... and I'm going out on a limb ... 8-8 on the season and 3-3 in the division!

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:23 AM | Report abuse

You are a minority here, so your opinion doesn't count. Look at the poll for confirmation and stop crying.

Posted by: abxinc | March 30, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse
--------------------

Welcome to America

Posted by: mattsoundworld | March 30, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

They know it. Why don't we?

Posted by: Original_etrod | March 30, 2010 9:47 AM

That's why I don't get all of the Skins must go o-line at 4 and 37 talk. Two rookie o-linemen are not going to push THIS TEAM over the top. If there's a QB around whom you can build your program, you snatch him and go from there.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

I will say this........if Campbell had the time that Rypien had in his Super Bowl year...we would have had a winning record. We would have also had a winning record with Carrot Top at QB with that line too though.

Posted by: westjr88 | March 30, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

From RI:

The burning question last week was, Is Bradford healthy enough to be the No. 1 pick? He apparently is ...

Really. With all those drills he went through on pro day yesterday we never saw the "DL drives shoulder into turf, no problemo" drill did we?

Posted by: ElDrano | March 30, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

But you can make up butthead posts like this.

Posted by: ElDrano | March 30, 2010 10:18 AM


Sure can. But I can't make up 1987 cutdowns like this either...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

lh, are you being serious? No one is saying that taking 2 ol will remake this team into a winner. However taking 2 ol will address the BIGGEST NEED on the team, LT/RT. I mean, am I being filmed while I type this? Is this a joke or something?

They had/have the WORST offensive line in the NFL last year, and since then have only regressed. But lets go qb at #4...makes perfect sense...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

I am not saying, nor did I say that Ben is equal to JC. I was pointing out that BB has been to 2 SB and both times his WRs got the MVP, and both were won on the backs of the defense. In his first superbowl his QBR was in the 20's.
Posted by: alex35332 | March 30, 2010 9:59 AM
Not to mention that if the refs had called a fair game when they “beat” the Seahawks, Big Ben would only have 1 ring……

Posted by: dlhaze1 | March 30, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

it's spring break.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

That's why I don't get all of the Skins must go o-line at 4 and 37 talk. Two rookie o-linemen are not going to push THIS TEAM over the top. If there's a QB around whom you can build your program, you snatch him and go from there.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:26 AM

I get it ... its based on the Jets rebuilding strategy ... first they drafted D'Brickashaw Ferguson (LT) and Nick Mangold (C), then in the next draft they drafted Marc Sanchez (QB). During that first waiting year, they were able to put the running game on Thomas Jones ... and focus on building their defense through free agency. [Then they put a cherry on top by drafting Darrelle Revis.]

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Sure, let's acquire Bradford.

We can give up the #4 pick, our Round 2 selection, Brian Orakpo and next year's #2 pick.

How does that sound?

Yep, trade ALL of our future just to recoup what would be a 'piece' of it.

Some people are putting Bradford on a pedestal like he is going to be Elway or Manning reincarnated.

I don't believe it.

And Elway didn't win a championship until Denver was finally able to get Terrell Davis, Shannon Sharpe, Rod Smith and a DEFENSE.

It's a 53 man roster fellas, not a roster of 1.

Posted by: leopard09 | March 30, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Wow...the Pats have a whopping 12 picks, 3 of which in the 2nd round. Now THAT'S how you reload...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

It's a 53 man roster fellas, not a roster of 1.
Posted by: leopard09 | March 30, 2010 10:31 AM | Report abuse

People playing too much flag football and arena football.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 30, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Gotta love how people see a workout where a guy is throwing with no pressure and decide they want to give up next years first to get him. The fact remains that most of Bradford's college career he was in the shotgun with years to throw. When he played against great defenses he was ok not spectacular. At least with picks like Matt Ryan and Philip Rivers they made there teams good when there was only marginal talent around them. With Bradford and Clausen that is not the case.

Laying off of qb until late until the draft is not a pro JC thing its a common sense thing. Several people have posted the draft is deep in offensive line talent. That is a myth, there are only a few lineman that you would feel comfortable starting next year. Sure there a projects like Ducasse,B.Campbell, but the skins need to take people who can start next year. They need to take lineman with their first two picks they should only get creative if they get some additional picks.

Lastly, Shanahan is not good at developing qbs despite what some of you may think. Jarious Jackson, Brian Griese, Matt Mauck, Jeff Lewis, Bradlee Van Pelt, and Jay Cutler were all drafted by Shanahan, any stars there? Draft Okung take the best available lineman in the second and build the team. Drafting someone high who probably wont play this season is just a continuation of the Cerrato type behavior that this team should be running away from.

Posted by: KingJoffeJoffer | March 30, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

... They had/have the WORST offensive line in the NFL last year, and since then have only regressed. ...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 10:31 AM

In fairness, I think the Cheeves had the worst one, but the Skins were real competitive for that bottom spot.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

lol @ brown.....

Posted by: westjr88 | March 30, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

OMG, he's the second coming of JC; he's TT incarnate; he's Superman and will carry the REDSKINS to the Super BOWL in 2010-11.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

That's why I don't get all of the Skins must go o-line at 4 and 37 talk. Two rookie o-linemen are not going to push THIS TEAM over the top. If there's a QB around whom you can build your program, you snatch him and go from there.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse
------------------------------

You don't think this team would benefit from an improved rushing attack? That our QB wouldn't be significantly better without linemen in his lap after 3 steps? That our WRs wouldn't be able to get more separation from a legitimate play action threat? That our defense wouldn't be able to rest more and therefore be more aggressive?

I disagree wholeheartedly. A pair of rookie linemen who have some talent could immediately legitimize the talent that we do have. Could. Not if they bust, of course, but could.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | March 30, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

The loss of both Chris Samuels and Randy Thomas had quite a bit to do with going 4-12.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Hells yeah I'm serious. You do know they have more than two picks in this draft and there are more drafts to follow. I'm not suggesting they start a rookie QB. Let JC and Sexy Rexy hold the fort while the kid learns the system. In 2011, he's ready to go with a decent o-line.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:17 AM

We have seen what th likes of Heyer, BMW gives us at tackle. One was an undrafted player, the other a former 1st rounder. Anything is possible, but to hinge the season hoping a 5-7 rounder would come in and hold his own against Ware, Osi and the gang, etc is not sound. Again I say if Bradford is the second coming of Akiman, then I wouldn't necessarily be upset. However, to compensate for the picks given up to trade up, the Skins may well have to trade players like, Carter, Los, JC at a bargain. That's the only way they minimize the talent drain of losing at least a 1st and 2 mid round picks in consecutive drafts; and the handling the cap when a new one is ratified.

Posted by: TWISI | March 30, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

"How durable is this guy and can he keep from getting into serious injury trouble in future? I think that's the question we should all be asking ourselves, not if he's somehow managed to heal after a prolonged period of time.

Posted by: driverdesign"

Exactly my thoughts. Nobody should be surprised at his pro day performance. His questions were never about his passing ability. They were about his durability in holding up against NFL defenses and his ability to see the field properly dropping back from under center rather than sitting in the shotgun. And his pro day performance did nothing to answer either of those questions.

For a team with only 5 selections in this draft and a list of needs longer than 90% of the league, I'd be skeptical using the #4 overall selection on him, let alone trading 4 draft picks.

Posted by: psps23 | March 30, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Like someone pointed out yesterday, the Skins had an All-Pro/Pro Bowler at LT for years and what did it get them?

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

And like I said before, they know this year isn't their year to win. I believe they're positioning themselves for years 4-5

Posted by: Devo2 | March 30, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

If so, they're doing it for the benefit of a future coaching staff and GM. NO ONE waits that long on a rebuilding project these days, not when teams like the Rams can suck one year and go to the Super Bowl the next.

Posted by: rbpalmer | March 30, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

How can posters think of moving UP to get BRADFORD when we're on a sinking ship? We need more planks for the hull in this draft not less by giving them away to become the first pick. That's like taking ERIC BERRY with the #4 overall, simply a luxury we cannot afford in this deep draft.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Yeah but Kyle will be developing the QB...not Mike. He seems to have done a good job with Schaub in Houston.

Posted by: westjr88 | March 30, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

I heard John Clayton this morning allude to Bradford's agent already telling the Rams that he's unlikely to sign before the draft. Leads me to believe he would like to force a trade. I don't think it makes sense for the skins with all of their needs to be giving up draft choices. Kindof goes counter to the pragmatic way Shanahan/Allen have approached this offseason as well.

Which means it'll probably happen: this years #1 and next years #1 and #4

Posted by: skinswest | March 30, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

No, let's pass on a QB because we don't need one. We already have the best in the league, bar none.

Rather than waste time and money trying to sign a new quarterback who might actually have some brains, skills and ability to play the position, we really ought to turn our efforts to signing JC17 to a lifetime contract at franchise player rates.

And since JC17 is around 28 or so, I am thinking about something in the 15-20 year range at around $15-20 million per season.

Trust me, at the current rate of inflation for player salaries, it will be a bargain in another 10 or 12 years -- when JC17 is finally ready to take his place among the league elite.

Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 7:38 AM


LOL. And I though I was the only one.

The problem has not been JC.
It has been the bacd coaches, Gibbs, Saunders, Zorn, et al, they know nothing about QBs.
It has been the receivers for not catching the ball while triple teamed.
It has been the receivers for not catching the ball thrown to the other side.
It has been the receivers for not intercepting the ball.
It has been last years bad O-line for all the previous years problems.
It has been the referees for not giving him more time to decide what to do with the freaking ball.
It has been Snyder for not being taller
It has been Snyder for expending money.
It has been Snyder for being Snyder
It has been the defense for putting him on the field too often.
It has been his shoes and socks.
it has been the grass
It has been everything no named JC
No sir! The problem has never been JC, the greatest QB that ever lived. Move over Sammy and Sonny, you couldn't carry JC's jocks.

Posted by: hock1 | March 30, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

But I can't make up 1987 cutdowns like this either...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:29 AM |

Hey because of steamers like you on this blog "butthead" will never have an expiration date.

Posted by: ElDrano | March 30, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Bradford was great in college. Really good, his completion percentage was out of this world. But all I can think about besides WVU waxing Okla in the fiesta bowl, bradford got his teeth kicked in the whole game but still put up numbers. But the final image i will always have is him writhing in pain twice in the same month or so after that shoulder got sqooshed.
I think he will recover and be a phenomenal passer but if you take a QB with the #1 pick there needs to be no doubts.

Posted by: Stu27 | March 30, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

The loss of both Chris Samuels and Randy Thomas had quite a bit to do with going 4-12.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse
--------------------

And in my book, those holes have still not been appropriately filled. We are hoping BMW steps up and Heyer can stay healthy, or we are looking at LT, RT, AND RG as problem areas

Posted by: mattsoundworld | March 30, 2010 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Like someone pointed out yesterday, the Skins had an All-Pro/Pro Bowler at LT for years and what did it get them?

You can't make stuff like this up....I mean, WHO writes this stuff....

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

TACKLE first unless we get multiple high picks for trades.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 8:10 AM | Report abuse

Oh wait, ERIC BERRY for the defense first.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Like someone pointed out yesterday, the Skins had an All-Pro/Pro Bowler at LT for years and what did it get them?

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:38 AM

The Skins had a Hall of Fame QB for years, what did it get them?

Posted by: Alan4 | March 30, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

And Elway didn't win a championship until Denver was finally able to get Terrell Davis, Shannon Sharpe, Rod Smith and a DEFENSE.

It's a 53 man roster fellas, not a roster of 1.

Posted by: leopard09 | March 30, 2010 10:31 AM

True but Elway did carry the Broncos to three other SB's albeit in a losing (utter shellacking) final effort.

Posted by: skinswest | March 30, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

And let me be clear, I am not advocating that the Skins mortgage their future to move up to take Bradford. I'm saying I won't be mad if they take a QB.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

The separation between worst and first in the NFL is a lot narrower than peeps are presuming for this "rebuilding" process. Every team has 53 guys ready to play in the NFL ... like it is their day job. The Skins have the bits and pieces for an awesome defense already ... that means progress if and when they make it to the offseason. Skins are loaded at receiver. I think 4-12 and landing so high in the draft order is flukier than the peeps realize. No doubt it was a bad season, badly conceived coaching-wise, and the wrong side of close scores due to stuff like injuries.

Also, today I have embraced the idea of picking up Buchanon to replace Smoot, I'm buzzing on my third cup of coffee, and I'm willing to remain agnostic on the possibility that an Easter Bunny could exist (and not just the Donnie Darko kind).

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Like someone pointed out yesterday, the Skins had an All-Pro/Pro Bowler at LT for years and what did it get them?

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:38 AM


Yeah, and the Chargers have a franchise QB taken 4th overall and what's that gotten THEM?

Works both ways, dude. Football games are won in the trenches. You build there consistently and hope the "skill" position guys come along and hold up their end of the bargain.

I don't get how a bunch of fans of the only team in the NFL best known for its legendary OFFENSIVE LINE PLAY and no obvious franchise QB in about 40 years can come to any other conclusion...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Bradford may be the second coming of Shuler too.....or Leaf,Klingler, Akili Smith,etc.

Posted by: westjr88 | March 30, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

I don't see what's wrong with this:

RD 1 - QB
RD 2 - LT/OL
RD 4 - RT/OL
RD 5 - LB
RD 7 - OL/LB/DL

You still get your franchise QB with THREE offensive linemen, and a linebacker.

If their draft went down something similar to that I wouldn't mind it at all.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Hey because of steamers like you on this blog "butthead" will never have an expiration date.

Posted by: ElDrano | March 30, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

And road apples to you sir. How about "BEAVIS" then?

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Palmer's got that one right. I'm not saying they're winning it all next year. But 4-5?! Might as well pack it in for the decade.

Posted by: DikShuttle | March 30, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

How can posters think of moving UP to get BRADFORD when we're on a sinking ship? We need more planks for the hull in this draft not less by giving them away to become the first pick. That's like taking ERIC BERRY with the #4 overall, simply a luxury we cannot afford in this deep draft.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse
------------------------------

But But But aren't we a QB away from annual Lombardi Trophies? That's all you need, right? I mean, heck, everyone complains about our Oline, but they played D-1 ball. That should be good enough, right? We have two former Pro-Bowl RBs, so we should be golden, right? And now that we are switching to the 3-4, our D will enter beast mode and destroy all, right? Yeah, a leet QB and we are set.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | March 30, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

I don't see what's wrong with this:

RD 1 - QB
RD 2 - LT/OL
RD 4 - RT/OL
RD 5 - LB
RD 7 - OL/LB/DL

You still get your franchise QB with THREE offensive linemen, and a linebacker.

If their draft went down something similar to that I wouldn't mind it at all.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

O.K. RED but......but you don't have ERIC BERRY at FS.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 10:46 AM

Mr. Bickle, you do understand that I am not going to make the pick, right?

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

The nightmare scenerio. At the fourth pick, BRADFORD, OKUNG, and CLAUSEN are off the board.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:53 AM | Report abuse

El Drano and Brownwood are having one of those fake fights with the battery powered light sabers...

El Drano: Brreeaarrr...bzzzzzzzzzzz
Brownwood: Waaaawwwwwh...zzzt

Posted by: mattsoundworld | March 30, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

What's funny is that lost in all this is the fact that San Diego ended up with the better QB. Shouldn't that be the cautionary tale?

Posted by: ouvan59 | March 30, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Red
I would not have a big problem with it until we saw who played out as a star or starter. I would have a big problem with trading up.

Posted by: alex35332 | March 30, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

You need an OL to protect the QB (i.e. Patrick Ramsey) first why waste the pick and future picks. With no OL you can have Montana back there and you will go nowhere. You can always get a QB in later rounds to develop (i.e. Tom Brady).. We need to be smart you need an OL once you have that anyone can throw the ball at the NFL level and win a SB (i.e. Trent Dilfer)

May I say more..

Posted by: NYSkinFAN | March 30, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

But But But aren't we a QB away from annual Lombardi Trophies? That's all you need, right? I mean, heck, everyone complains about our Oline, but they played D-1 ball. That should be good enough, right? We have two former Pro-Bowl RBs, so we should be golden, right? And now that we are switching to the 3-4, our D will enter beast mode and destroy all, right? Yeah, a leet QB and we are set.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | March 30, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

I roll with you all the way on that MATT.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

If Bradford's there at 4 you know they'll take him. Please do not trade to get him! My first choice is Okung with a QB later on, hopefully that plan will unfold.

Posted by: joeboggs | March 30, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

The nightmare scenerio. At the fourth pick, BRADFORD, OKUNG, and CLAUSEN are off the board.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:53 AM

That's not necessarily a nightmare ... it might even be a wet dream. If there are teams who want to leap frog over whoever picks immediately or shortly after the #4 spot, then the #4 spot might be trade bait for teams who have their sights set on Suh or the DT McCoy.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Skins are loaded at receiver.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:49 AM


That sound you just heard was my respect for sween crashing to the floor.

I get the point of the narrow differences between worst and first and even agree to an extent, but we earned 4-12 and were lucky to win any games at all based on the crap I saw. And to say we're "loaded at receiver"? Beyond insane...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

BTW, TERRELL WHITEHEAD is the answer at FS, and will probably not be drafted. Take it from the prescient one. He's golden.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

lh, it just seems so incredibly illogical, and short sighted to me to take a qb with the #4 pick...thats all.

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

True but Elway did carry the Broncos to three other SB's albeit in a losing (utter shellacking) final effort.

Posted by: skinswest | March 30, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse
---------------------------

Peyton Manning did the same thing this year. What did that team have besides him? A bunch of rookie WRs, a couple of pass rushers, and... *crickets*

That's what a truly great QB gives you, but they are so rare you can't expect to draft the next Peyton/Elway.

Posted by: mattsoundworld | March 30, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

The nightmare scenerio. At the fourth pick, BRADFORD, OKUNG, and CLAUSEN are off the board.
Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:53 AM

That's no nightmare.. the nightmare would be taking Claussen at #4. He's not going top 3. It would be Suh or someone willing to trade up for him.

Sorry, but the guy is the best player in the draft. If he falls to you, you have to take him, unless somebody blows your doors off with a trade offer.

Posted by: Rypien11 | March 30, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Why not just draft LT and RT with the first two picks this year and then next year trade every pick at your disposal to get J. Locker next year. That is unless we have the worst record in the league next year, in that case no worries.

Posted by: duncanrobee | March 30, 2010 10:59 AM | Report abuse

And road apples to you sir.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 10:50 AM |

Road apples? Now there's an expiration date. When's the last time you saw a horse and carriage on the interstate?

Posted by: ElDrano | March 30, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

[many lines of JC-related sarcasm deleted]
Posted by: Vic1 | March 30, 2010 7:38 AM

LOL. And I though I was the only one.

The problem has not been JC.
[many lines of anti-JC sarcasm deleted]

Posted by: hock1
--------------
Maybe you two should get a room.

Posted by: closer44 | March 30, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

If Bradford is thrown to the NFC East wolves without a decent O-line, you can guara-goddam-tee it he'll wrench that arm outta its socket..That said, he probably IS the best QB in the draft, forget Eli, maybe he's Shanahan's new Elway...

My AK's bigger than your AK, shrimp scampi, Happy Asadachi...

Posted by: frak | March 30, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Gl, get off the Berry stuff...that's beyond crazy...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

While Berry probably ranks at about 5th (after LT, QB, LB, RB) when it comes to depth/talent position of need, I'd be alright if they drafted Berry. Dude is going to be star in the NFL for a long time.

But the current state of the offensive line is something they can't put off in THIS years draft. 2 or 3 picks should be dedicated to linemen.


We got to trade down in order to get up.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

That's not necessarily a nightmare ... it might even be a wet dream. If there are teams who want to leap frog over whoever picks immediately or shortly after the #4 spot, then the #4 spot might be trade bait for teams who have their sights set on Suh or the DT McCoy.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

That would be sweet. And just what we need in this draft. More - not less picks. FA is obviously not getting it done for the main needs on this team. Trades and/or picks seems to be our salvation.

The "nightmare" was more for the people who write these articles for the WaPO. Most of whom rarely seem to think outside the box or have the guts to put it in print.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

What does everyone think of these guys picked up a few weeks back?
Paul Fanaika OG, Lichtensteiger, and Clint Oldenburg OT? Think Shanahan has a plan to use any of them on the starting line? I don't claim to know how good/bad any of these guys are, but perhaps coach has some O-linemen already.

Posted by: 1965skinsfan | March 30, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

If it isn't an offensive lineman, it doesn't matter what the speculation is. We should trade #4 and drop back to get a couple of 1st round picks or fill out the rest of our anemic draft (and draft only offensive lineman). QB? There is always a "next best". JC may be awesome. Gibbs certainly knew how to work with QBs (3 different fellows at QB for the various Super Bowl wins)and traded up to get him. Without an offensive line, you could put anyone back there and it won't matter.

Posted by: KDSmallJr | March 30, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Gl, get off the Berry stuff...that's beyond crazy...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

All that's just for you honey. LOL.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

He** no don't trade up for a QB every year in the draft just about there is a can't miss QB, we have 3 QB's on the roster already use this draft to sure up the O-line and other positions, go into this season with what you have at QB if it doesn't pan out then get a QB next year i'm sure as usual there will be some can't miss guys coming out...plus if this guy couldn't hold up against the likes of the teams that got him hurt before how long do you think he'll last in the NFL and the NFC Beast??? Also you might even find a gem in the later rounds at QB...Bradford and Claussen aren't a must have in my book...

Posted by: papaskynz | March 30, 2010 11:05 AM | Report abuse

brownwood26, Thomas and Kelly both showed some solid flashes late in the season. Sophomore years are when receivers start to blossom. I see Davis being used as a receiver (like Cooley) as well. Moss is solid. Marko Mitchell looks like he has upside as well. To me, that means loaded at receiver. I will scream till I'm blue in the face if the Skins go to the well for T.O. or Brandon Marshall.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, and the Chargers have a franchise QB taken 4th overall and what's that gotten THEM?

Works both ways, dude. Football games are won in the trenches. You build there consistently and hope the "skill" position guys come along and hold up their end of the bargain.

I don't get how a bunch of fans of the only team in the NFL best known for its legendary OFFENSIVE LINE PLAY and no obvious franchise QB in about 40 years can come to any other conclusion...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 10:49 AM

Are you serious? '06: 14-2 playoffs div crown, '07: 11-5 div crown,AFC Championship game, 08: 8-8 div crown playoffs, '09: 13-3, div crown, playoffs. I'll take that all day over what we've been getting.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Road apples? Now there's an expiration date. When's the last time you saw a horse and carriage on the interstate?

Posted by: ElDrano | March 30, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Up in LANCASTER, PA. last week. Over in DAYTON, VA. this week.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Skins are loaded at receiver.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 10:49 AM


That sound you just heard was my respect for sween crashing to the floor.

I get the point of the narrow differences between worst and first and even agree to an extent, but we earned 4-12 and were lucky to win any games at all based on the crap I saw. And to say we're "loaded at receiver"? Beyond insane...

Posted by: brownwood26


Maybe not loaded but "heavily sprinkled".


*pause*


With Moss, Thomas, Kelly, and Mitchell (And TWO pass catching TEs) you have to feel a little secure with that group.

Posted by: RedDMV | March 30, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

damb non-beepers failing to beep

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

But you're right, NOT on the interstate.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

If in fact the Skins make a successful play for Bradford, and Mike & Kyle coach up JC to some form of competency while SB sits and learns, they can perhaps swing a trade in 2011 from a team disparate for a QB. Wishful Thinking?

Posted by: Spanglerg | March 30, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

I don't see what's wrong with this:

RD 1 - QB
RD 2 - LT/OL
RD 4 - RT/OL
RD 5 - LB
RD 7 - OL/LB/DL

You still get your franchise QB...
----------------
Or else you get Heath Shuler. I'm assuming you don't mean trade up and get Bradford, but then the question becomes: Is Clausen more likely a franchise QB or a future congressman? I have my opinion (if we draft Clausen I'll hope for the best, but fear the worst), but I'm nowhere near Shanahan's pay grade, so obviously he'll have to make that call.

Posted by: closer44 | March 30, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

lh, it just seems so incredibly illogical, and short sighted to me to take a qb with the #4 pick...thats all.

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse
-------------------------

Mitigating Factor 1: The top QBs this year don't scream franchise. Of the two, I'd tend to go with Clausen. Wouldn't even mind Tebow because the guy is one of those winner types that just seems to have a horseshoe lodged somewhere. But not at #4.

Mitigating Factor 2: QB is not our top need

Mitigating Factor 3: QB is not even our top 5 need (LT, RT, RG, RB, LB, S, NT, K, WR)

Posted by: mattsoundworld | March 30, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

I will scream till I'm blue in the face if the Skins go to the well for T.O. or Brandon Marshall.

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Now there's a "nightmare" scenerio for you.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

beep beep

Posted by: dcsween | March 30, 2010 11:12 AM | Report abuse

That sound you just heard was my respect for sween crashing to the floor.

I get the point of the narrow differences between worst and first and even agree to an extent, but we earned 4-12 and were lucky to win any games at all based on the crap I saw. And to say we're "loaded at receiver"? Beyond insane...

Posted by: brownwood26

Everything's relative brownie. In relation to say LT, the O-line in general, or LB. This IS the REDSKINS after all.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

It is not a question of whether Bradford is healthy. It is more of a question of whether Bradford will remain healthy. If the Redskins needed just a quarterback to fill out their team for a run to the playoffs and beyond then trading up for either Bradford or Clausen would be reasonable. Unfortunately, the skins are not in such a position. Stick with seeing what is available with the 4th pick.

Posted by: jrussell1 | March 30, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Are you serious? '06: 14-2 playoffs div crown, '07: 11-5 div crown,AFC Championship game, 08: 8-8 div crown playoffs, '09: 13-3, div crown, playoffs. I'll take that all day over what we've been getting.

Posted by: learnedhand1 | March 30, 2010 11:07 AM


Yeah, and what...2 playoff wins to show for it?

If you ain't first, you're last.

But to answer your question would love to see that sort of success here...what you fail to realize is that in addition to Philip Rivers, the Chargers have one of the better O-lines in football.

Which was mostly built before he got there.

If anything, the Chargers prove my point...

Posted by: brownwood26 | March 30, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

lh, it just seems so incredibly illogical, and short sighted to me to take a qb with the #4 pick...thats all.

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | March 30, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse
-------------------------

Mitigating Factor 1: The top QBs this year don't scream franchise. Of the two, I'd tend to go with Clausen. Wouldn't even mind Tebow because the guy is one of those winner types that just seems to have a horseshoe lodged somewhere. But not at #4.

Mitigating Factor 2: QB is not our top need

Mitigating Factor 3: QB is not even our top 5 need (LT, RT, RG, RB, LB, S, NT, K, WR)

Posted by: mattsoundworld | March 30, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

You go MATT. That seems logical to me except I would put a need at QB #7.

And the current state of the club doesn't warrent a cluster-f on the defense by changing to a 3-4 THIS year. We can roll the personnel over the next two seasons to that status starting with NT (MAAKE). Then go to one of these in this draft - ILB, OLB, FS.

Posted by: glawrence007 | March 30, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Depends what they would have to give up. If they have to give up the 4th overall pick and another 1st round pick next year, I say "no". If they need to give up this year's first and a first rounder in 2012. "Maybe".

I think it is worth exploring, but you have to be wise about the scenario. Eli Manning was not coming off a shoulder injury, so the deal shouldn't be the same.

Posted by: BT23 | March 30, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

For too long the skins have tried to build a house without a foundation. Let's not ruin another 1st round QB until there are first string NFL O Linemen playing for this team.
Hail,

Posted by: burke_jack | March 30, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Hell to the NO!

Posted by: Lisa_R | March 30, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

"We've been talking with sources around the league about the draft for several weeks and two things are clear: The Redskins are very high on Bradford, and they might have to get creative in order to get him."

Been a RI supporter for years but this is wafer-thin stuff Jason.

Posted by: Pepper5 | March 30, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

most of the fiends that rant about campbell are nothing more than racist idiots like the tea baggers one of the many forms of white racism (or di-k head baggers)as I call them,they want a great white hope(dope)qb be it c.brennan(2nd coming of ed mcmahon or is it jim does not matter same thing)or any pale skinned qb. eli manning is not a good qb solid but not good put a couple of good hits on him like the eagles do frequently and he will fall apart,washington certainly never does that because when they play the giants they perform like a bunch of scared punks. fix the o-line control the line of scrimmage

Posted by: wathu19 | March 30, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

how does he rate with previous 'co called great c QB?' he's certainly no Elway and that took awhile for a ring!

Posted by: aypub | March 30, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

how does he rate with previous 'co called great c QB?' he's certainly no Elway and that took awhile for a ring!

Posted by: aypub | March 30, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

No way should the Skins make a push for Bradford. First, Bradford's injury prone. His two serious injuries his senior year may have just been bad luck, and don't necessarily mean he won't be durable in the pros. But at the very least, it raises enough questions that no club should be clamoring to spend 1st pick in the draft money on him. Second, QB is simply not the highest need area on the Skins roster. True, Campbell's not going to the HoF. But he's adequate and has done well for significant stretches when properly protected and when operating in an offensive system that doesn't ask him to throw 4TDs a game in order to win. We need a rebuilt line more than anything. We should be trying to trade the pick we have to get more picks down the line to get O Linemen in bulk.

Posted by: mbcnewspaper | March 30, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Why do we need to break the bank with future picks by going on getting one? Sure Bradford looked good throwing the ball for the coaches and reporters present, but what happens when he doesn't have a Left Tackle protecting his" BLINDSIDE". Maybe we need Leigh Ann Tuohy there to tell them,"Mike..Bruce yall do know we need a LT on help protect the QB"?..If Vinny was still there making that decision with Snyder, everyone would be blasting that idea out of the water. The media outlet would be saying, "Business as usual at Redskins Park"! Wilbon and Kornheiser would be debating that decision for weeks.
Go out get the offensive line fixed. God knows we don't need Portis and Larry Johnson blowing things up either!!!!

Posted by: WARPATH85 | March 30, 2010 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Vic [and others],

It isn't that fixing the O-line and getting a starting QB have to be mutually exclusive in the [or this] draft.

Not at all.

HOW-EV_ER, it is nigh-impossible to draft both a FRANCHISE QB and a future DOMINANT, LONG-TERM, FRANCHISE caliber Left Tackle in the same draft.

I'm not sure that's even EVER been done.

There are a dozen guys in this season's draft (easily) who would be an upgrade over what the Skins have been trotting out at LT the last 2-3 years.

[Samuels was a warrior, but all the seasons of abuse just finally caught up with him for AT LEAST the last 3 seasons]

About half of those guys are legit potential long term answer guys at LT.

They're probably not legends, but they should be solid guys who won't get your QB killed, or cost you games with dumb mistakes.

There are another half dozen guys who likely will be better RIGHT Tackles than we've trotted out, too.

[Though playing Artis Hicks, or re-signing Levi Jones to start at RIGHT Tackle if the team had/decides to doesn't really offend me, either].

The team should be able to land a legit starting LT, a QB to raise for the future, and a young CB [to take the nickle and backup role for now] to bring up out of this draft.

Everything else would be biscuits and gravy, as many if not all of the other holes can and should be able to be addresed with a blend of veteran or undrafted free-agency candidates.

I'm not saying "I guarantee this Redskins squad will make the Super Bowl this season if they follow THIS plan".

I'm saying this team can easily improve, become legitimately competitive in the division again, and set a SOLID foundation to continue building for future growth in this one draft...if they simply continue to follow the tendancies they have already shown.

Those tendancies are; have a plan, be calm, know what you are willing to part with for a pick or player, and know what is too much to give away or spend for one.

Bruce Allen and Coach Shanahan have set a good tone in that regard. Let's just hope they stick to it.

Hail!

Posted by: ThinkingMan | March 30, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

The Chargers got Philip Rivers, Nick Kaeding, Shawn Merriman and Wesley Britt for Eli. Not bad!

Posted by: PEIL | March 30, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

I can understand the argument for and against Sam Bradford. With the 4th pick in any draft I would hope the selection is a sure bet to start for the next 10 years. It's that valuable. Is that Sam Bradford? Is anyone really without doubt?

I'm pretty sure there's an overlooked quarterback out there that will be taken in the 4th-5th-6th round who will eventually be an all-star in the league.

Posted by: wkrdove | March 30, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

In the voice of Monty from the Simpsons: He looked wonderful tip-toeing through the tulips without a care in the world. My, he looks like a fine quarterback Smithers!

Posted by: richs91 | March 30, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

I say Yes to Bradford. You guys that say the pick has to be offensive lineman no matter what must think we are going to be playing the super bowl next year. If we can't get Bradford for a reasonable price then I take a O-lineman. The line didn't break in a year and isn't going to be totally fixed in a year either. I'll take a franchise QB over a lineman any day....Clausen doesn't count because he is no franchise qb.
1. Bradford
2. Top lineman available.
100. Clausen

Posted by: Redskins001 | March 30, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

I'd be okay with them taking Bradford at #4 but don't trade up for him

Posted by: graywolf323 | March 30, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

IDOIT FANS WE NEED LINEMEN TO BLOCK FOR THE QB SO HE DOES NOT GET HURT. DO YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE GAME GOES?

Jason you have a bum job! You could not thank of anything else to write about?

Your a journalist, why lower your self to sports radio talk.

The idoits that are saying pick a QB are tripin. This is not FF. You need to have a Offensive line FIRST!

Posted by: SOLVBACK | March 30, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Here we go! Yet another Redskins splashy off-season move to get headlines.

I you're trading-up to #1 overall to get a quarterback, that guy better be the closest thing to a mortal lock All-Pro there is. Not a guy who dislocates his THROWING SHOULDER every time he reaches for his toothbrush.

I'm sure he's 100% recovered from his last three separated shoulders. It's the next 5 he suffers before being forced to retire at age 24 that I'm worried about.

The only trade the Redskins should be thinking about on draft day is trading DOWN to get extra picks -- each of which should be used on offensive and defensive linemen!

But we all know Dan Snyder can't stand being ignored in April. So fire-up 'Redskins 1' and fly out to St. Louis and give them the next 10 first round picks and let's mortgage even more of what is laughingly called your "future".

Well, they haven't done it yet. So I'm withholding judgment. But the minute they pull the trigger on this deal, I am officially done with the team I have loved since 1970.

Kevin Olson
Manassas, VA

Posted by: noslok | March 30, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't anyone remember what happens to any quarterback without a line to protect him. Patrick Ramsey got more hits than redskins.com.
Get the line fixed and any decent QB will be successful under Mikey S.

Posted by: januk101 | March 30, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

This obsession with 'the next big thing' has cost this franchise PLENTY. It has been proven here that if you control the line of scrimmage, it does not matter who your QB is, they can be successful.

Why keep trying to reinvent the wheel? Why keep trying a failed philosophy that has netted this organization zilch in 10 years?

Posted by: kahlua87 | March 30, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Beyond anything else we need an offensive line. Bradford with our present tackles = injury list.

It would be like spending your mortgage money on a shiny car and then watch your kid
drive it into a tree. No one is happy in the end.

Posted by: driley | March 30, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

For the #1 pick I'd trade our 4th pick, Andre Carter, Jason Campbell, and a 3rd round for next year. At the most.

But I'd rather not.

Posted by: lordtwang | March 30, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

But there are certainly scenarios in which the Rams would want to listen to offers. There are some who believe Bradford might prefer to play for Washington rather than St. Louis. With the Redskins, he'd be able to sit behind Jason Campbell for a year and learn the system
_____
Reid truely is an idiot.. First why would a midwest guy want to come to the east coast when he can play relatively close to home? Second learn behind Campbell??? Skins sign Bradford or Clausen and Campbell will want out. Does Reid really believe Campbell wants to learn a new system to teach another QB only to be gone in 2011??? Not to mention all signs show Shanahan doesn't even want Campbell on the team. Lastly the Rams play in the crappy NFC West.. with Warner gone there is no power house anymore.. why would Bradford want to come to the tough NFC East.. especially to a team with a history of disfunction??? Yes I know Reid is in love with Campbell and is trying to come up with any plan to keep him a little longer but now he is just talking crazy...

Posted by: sovine08 | March 30, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

When the new coach comes in and literally laughs at the plays and formation the previous coaching staff ran that tells you, it is not simply the players.

If anything comes out of the Shanahan-Allen era, i hope is the organization gains some semblance of focus and direction.

If we draft this kid or any other QB as our savior, we are still on the same failed road.

Posted by: oknow1 | March 30, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Getting Bradford would be like getting a McClaren engine for a '58 Edsel. We've got a LOT of upgrading to do before an engine like that is going to make ANY kind of difference.

Posted by: LaureninGlenBurnie | March 30, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Bradford is no Sanchez or Safford, when is the last time a quarterback came out of Oklahoma an did anything in the NFL?

The Redskins need offensive lineman , linebackers, offensive lineman, running backs, defensive lineman...

A quarterback is not a position of need and keep this in mind Shanahan was only average his last couple of years in the league as far as winning so lets hope all this hype about Bradford or the hideous Clausen is just that

Posted by: BeatDontStop | March 30, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

This has to be the dumbest question posted. If the Skins do a trade like that I'm finally done. The Rivers-Eli trade shows the difficulty is even trying to peg a "great" qb. Rivers is significantly better than Eli, yet the Giants traded him, another 1st and change. Do you think they'd do that deal today? Burning picks was the downfall of this team under Cerrato. They actually have value people. You keep and use them all.

Posted by: ElSith | March 30, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

what part don't you guys understand that if we draft Bradford, HE DOESN'T HAVE TO START until 2 years after? You can find SOLID STARTING OTACKLES in a 2ND ROUND (JON JANSEN like) a 3RD ROUND (DERRICK DOCKERRY like) in a Couple years, Bradford would have studied enough under the SHANNAHAN management.

YES WE NEED OLINE MAN, BUT WON'T BE FIXED IN A YEAR! Franchase QB are important, they can take you to the next level especially if they have those intangibles of a Payton Manning like, awarenes, smart on the pocket when making a decision, Bradford fills all that; you can manage to develope a smart QB like him.

Is not the same when you try to develope a Dumb QB like Russell if he doesn't have a football IQ, you don't always find QB with the intelligence of Manning, any QB can throw a football, but if he is not that smart, you can teach him all you want and if his abilities and mental thoughness are average, they will develope into a averge QB.

We need Bradford! if he is not available, yes OKUNG will be the immediate solution, but a smart QB like BRADFORD, you will not find him in next years class! how many smart Payton Mannings do we have? not that many! just 1, the closes cloan is Eli, and guess what, he won a SB!

these smart QB don't come everyday! Brady is a late round exception, where is the other one for those who always bring that argument to the table, that you can find one in later rounds? yest there are always bust even in first rounds, but after 18 YEARS OF GOING NO WHERE, we have to take a chance with QB!

DRAFT BRADFORD! he won't get hurt, he can sit and learn for a couple years! YES WE NEED LINEMAN, but we can get them in later rounds in the next couple of years!

Posted by: slvtruco21 | March 30, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Lets keep Jason Campbell and continue to loose :)

Posted by: rjclay | March 30, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

People forget that Chargers already had Drew Brees -- who like Eli Manning, has one more ring than Philip Rivers.

Posted by: loux24 | March 30, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

CHASE DANIELS!!!CHASE DANIELS!!!CHASE DANIELS!!!CHASE DANIELS!!!CHASE DANIELS!!!CHASE DANIELS!!!

Why they let him go...He's a future QB and we'll regret he got away.

Posted by: clifton3 | March 30, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

A lot of comments about Shanahan grooming quarterbacks. He's gone all the way only with Elway, whom he didn't groom. The rest?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Denver_Broncos_starting_quarterbacks.

I wouldn't put too much stock in Shanahan's "grooming" habits.

Posted by: edwcorey | March 30, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

I say take Bradford if he is available at #4. If not, trade down and get additional picks. Pick a QB, OL, LB, DL, RB, safety, etc.

JC showed me something in the last 5 games of the season but he is not the Skins long term QB. From my understanding, he has most of the physical skills but is not cerebral enough.

Posted by: neil64 | March 30, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

if the Skin had a o-line yes, but the 0-line to to just to bad to give up the pick to move up to get him. but if he at 4, I said pick him. the Notre Dame QB. only in the very late 1 or 2 round for there never been and I just can,t see a 1st round QB being good in the pro

Posted by: lostdogrwd101 | March 30, 2010 6:22 PM | Report abuse

sorry, but not seriously addressing the O line is throwing in the towel. There is a difference between accepting that problems can't be fixed in one season, and in leaving the biggest, most glaring, most misery inspiring problem to continue to fester for another season. That just shoves us, players and fans, that much deeper in the hole of sports despair. Next November, if we are winding up another 4-12 year of watching our QB, be it JC or Grossman, getting battered and putting 15 points a game on the board, it will be little comfort to think, yeah, but we got gimpy shouldered super accurate Sam Bradford waiting in the wings!

Posted by: kenboy1 | March 31, 2010 12:36 AM | Report abuse

Learn from the Skins' own past. They won 3 super bowls with 3 different QBs who will only get into the hall of fame if they buy a ticket. The reason was an OLine (the Hogs) who kept those average QBs standing upright an extra 1.5 seconds and whose run blocking made play-action fakes credible. With a great QB playing behind a bad OLine, what you soon have is a corpse. PLEASE stop with the fantasy nonsense and use those early picks on OLinemen.

Posted by: dolph924 | March 31, 2010 1:22 AM | Report abuse

Learn from the Skins' own past. They won 3 super bowls with 3 different QBs who will only get into the hall of fame if they buy a ticket. The reason was an OLine (the Hogs) who kept those average QBs standing upright an extra 1.5 seconds and whose run blocking made play-action fakes credible. With a great QB playing behind a bad OLine, what you soon have is a corpse. PLEASE stop with the fantasy nonsense and use those early picks on OLinemen.

Posted by: dolph924 | March 31, 2010 1:23 AM | Report abuse

Helloooo? Bimbo heads, why do u keep on saying BRADFORD will get killed behind our line? WHAT PART DONT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT HE DOESN'T HAVE TO START until 1-2 yrs;

WE KNOW THE LINE NEEDS TO GET ADDRESSED! It wont get fixed overnight, we can find good solid TACKLE IN LATE ROUNDS!

perfect samples are JON JANSEN 2ND ROUNDER, DERRICK DOCKERRY 3RD ROUNDER; and a few young undrafeted tackles can be brought in as well.

if we don't get BRADFORD OR OKUNG, we definitely gotta trade up, give up our #4 pick and get in return;

late 1st round;
two 2nd rounders
a 3rd round and 5th round, which should add up 1800 points that the 4th overall pick is worth on the NFL draft chart.

or two late first round, and 3rd round.

do you guys read before you make comments?

Posted by: slvtruco21 | March 31, 2010 2:11 AM | Report abuse

I say take Bradford if he is available at #4. If not, trade down and get additional picks. Pick a QB, OL, LB, DL, RB, safety, etc.

JC showed me something in the last 5 games of the season but he is not the Skins long term QB. From my understanding, he has most of the physical skills but is not cerebral enough.

Posted by: neil64 | March 30, 2010 5:39 PM

up to this point, unless JC shows something spectacular and excels dramatically and proves everyone wrong (that is if he doesn't get traded before season starts, and even gets that chance) JC is plain average; every skin fan knows what are JC limits, his brain freezes, not a quick decision maker, a split second can make a difference when throwing it with confidence to a WR, how many times did we see JC go deeeeeep, either it was an over thrown pass or he threw it a second or two late and by the time the pass got to the WR the double coverage was already on the WR.

Remember 07? when we made that push to the playoffs with a 9-7 record? why did that happen?

because JC got hurn against the bears, what i remember of that game is that JC was struggling all night, moving down the field was a nail bitter because we were bearly making first downs; because he didn't have that quick decision to throw when a player was open, not sure wheather to make the pass or not, and kept on throwing dinks and dunks; next thing you know, he gets hurt and all of a sudden Collins found open players;

hmmmm I wonder why? maybe because TCollins made quick decision; maybe read play better? who knows but the fact is, sorry to say for JC who is a cool person; at 5-7 if JC doesn't get hurt, we would have never gotten on that run to make the playoffs, Collins was airing it, we won 4 straight games; from a 0-13 defeceit agains the SEAHAWKS in the playoffs, old Todd made an improbable come back and we took the lead 14-13 in the 4th QUARTER with 6 minutes to go; but the temper and experience of a FRANCHISE QB in MATT HASSELBECK (an older Hesselbeck of course, a few of tricks left to throw a couple solid TD passes that killed our skins) managed to finish our hopes.

I wish Campbell the best, I hope he shuts a lot of us, and play off the charts next year if he get a chance, and proves everyone he can excel; but as for know he is not the QB that would take us to the next level.
|

Posted by: slvtruco21 | March 31, 2010 2:42 AM | Report abuse

JC17 is a walking, talking 4th round pick in this year's draft. His future with the Redskins does not extend into May, 2010.

Posted by: Political_Stratgst | March 31, 2010 2:59 AM | Report abuse

look, I know everyone on this board is going to be saying keep JC keep JC, but thats the wrong decision. Even with chris samuels at his absolute best we did was 9-7

this is becoming a more QB central league and the skins need to get with the program.

JC may be a good locker room guy, but even in his first few seasons as a starter when the line was much better he was still what he is now. The truth is JC is probably a good guy, but he in all his seasons as the starter he has been incredibly inconsistant and has struggled with decision making. Since the redskins are under a new regime that means a new QB in about every situation.

The fact is we need a change and we need it now. we could go back to barely making the playoffs and have a chris samuels clone. If we take jimmy clausen and maybe trade up and get Charles Brown or Anthony Davis we can fix our line and have a franchise quarterback who can be the face of the team for years to come

Posted by: greg_morton | April 1, 2010 8:33 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company