Winds of Change are Blowing at Redskins Park
by Tiller56 on Mar 13, 2010 8:05 AM EST
124 comments
To steal the lyrics of a great band from the 80’s, the Scorpions: "The future’s in the air, can feel it everywhere. I’m blowing with the winds of change." Change is certainly in the air at Redskins Park these days as the new staff searches for a new identity in a new decade that is sure to bring about major change to our team. The rumors abound of a new 3-4 defense, a youthful roster built more from the draft than free agency, and a changing of the guard in coaching staff and philosophy. The once spend-happy approach of an owner desperate to do anything to win a super bowl, has now been replaced with a thrifty, cautious approach, that has taken many Redskins fans by surprise this off-season. Yet we have only just begun. The Redskins are in desperate need of a new face-of-the-franchise. Our aging stars of the past have become just that; aging stars. Many of these old faces have moved on to different teams, leaving us with a mixture of veteran players who can provide depth and leadership, and un-proven young players eager to show the new staff what they are capable of doing. Every good franchise has a good mix of the previous two, but every good franchise also has one thing we are lacking; a face of the franchise. In the Cerrato days, owner Daniel Snyder, and his puppet Vinny positioned Clinton Portis as the poster boy for the Redskins. Postis’ light-hearted spirit, combined with his unusual media-day garb provided some entertainment value for those in the DC area. He was also able to back up his childish demeanor with stellar play on the football field. Those days are long gone, and although Shanahan still believes Portis to be an integral part of his offense in 2010, he has certainly not endeared himself to the Redskins faithful over the last 2 year. His lack of off-season conditioning, poor work ethic, and questionable leadership abilities have left the Redskins in a precarious situation: A franchise without an identity. So moving forward to April 22nd, in prime time under the lights in NYC, in front of millions of viewers, the Redskins have a chance to become relevant again. We need a new leader of this team, and a new face of the franchise to lead us into the new decade and back to relevance. And it just so happens that, as many pundits also believe, we are in need of a new quarterback to carry the franchise out of the dark ages. Enter Sam Bradford. Bradford is one of the most accomplished quarterbacks in the history of the Big12. His record setting Heisman year of 2008 was nothing short of amazing. He has shown the moxy that few of his age and experience have, and is a proven winner. He does, however, come with some concerns. He was injured early in the 2009 season, when his shoulder was crushed by nearly 300lbs of weight from a jarring hit he sustained during a game. His season ended abruptedly, and all were left to second guess his future. But now with a clean bill of health, and the resume to go along with it, his rise and fall should be catapulted yet again with an early round draft selection in the 2010 NFL draft. Some lucky team is going to give him millions to become their next franchise quarterback, and face of the franchise. For a team like the Redskins, who are in desperate need for an identity, this could be a match made in Daniel Snyder heaven. To quote the Scorpions yet again, "the wind of change blows straight, into the face of time", and that time is now for a once storied franchise who is suffering from a major identity crisis. Will Bradford become the change we are looking for and so desperately need? Only time will tell.
0 recs |
124 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Crap.
1st off anyone quoting a Scorpion song’s is a complete douche, as you have thoroughly proven with this personal written fellation of Sam Bradford. It’s a mistake to draft a Qb so high in the draft and watch him reinjure a shoulder in his 1st game as a pro. Then, only to come back and have the same thing happen again and again. If you think we should draft anything other than OL at 4 overal, it would take little convincing of most Psyche Phd’s that you are clinically insane and full blown retarded.(You know, the type of mentally challenged malcontent that is a sex offender) Its funny you say we are getting younger when we just signed a 30yr old Rb. A 29yr old Te. A 29yr Ol. That doesnt seem moving in a younger direction. Why dont you just gay pride parade for JC to be traded? Thats what your mouth obviously wants so you can fill it with the likes of a Qb that is going to get turned into paste behind any Ol we can put together this season. If were going to get a Qb it shouldnt be in the 1st round. We have a starter on this roster already. I guess this post was well written, but Im betting that even your asshole believes your opinions on this subject are shit.
by TheOverLordMarshl on Mar 13, 2010 8:43 AM EST reply actions
While the overlord is Over the top as usual
Bradford or Clausen would be a mistake unless the Redskins pick up more draft picks before the draft. In my opinion I think McCoy is being targeted in the 2nd.
A former longhorn as offensive coordinator, no QB from a College Spread offense has succeeded in the NFL…The Shanahan’s believe they are can make the impossible happen, and will set out to prove that with a strong running game a spread offense QB from college can perform and lead a team in the NFL. Watch for the draft of Colt McCoy
Vince Young was in a spread offense and is a 2x Pro-Bowler
And of course he went to UT.
"I am excited about starting 2009. We are looking forward to an outstanding year. We're on our way. We have a lot of healthy players this year." - Vinny Cerrato
by Kevin Ewoldt on Mar 13, 2010 11:58 AM EST up reply actions
How's that worked the last 2 years
Just say’in Vince Young does not come to mind when anyone thinks of a winning QB who excels at his position
Vince Young
Also got in the pro-bowl with a lower QB rating then JC, and has been an alternate each time he got in.
and he played understudy for two years
While Collins was showing him how to be a NFL QB. I think Young is and can be a tremendous talent but for some guys it takes time and I thought Tennessee was right to pull him when they did and then to put him back in when they did. The thing is, does Sam Bradford resemble Vince Young’s skill set in the slightest?
he may be smarter (and remember there’s smart and there’s football smart)
he may have a better arm ( I can’t say for sure but Young has a pretty credible arm)
he doesn’t have the same athletic ability
he does have an injury history and we don’t know how that may turn out
A guy with this many question marks wouldn’t be getting my money at the #4 slot if it was my team, but it isn’t my team, I’m not a football coach or a scout, I can only go by what I have seen and read.
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
And I agree Bradford at #4 for the Redskins would be a Mistake IMO
And I believe Vince Young will be a solid NFL QB, his 2 years of learning is exactly what he needs. That’s why I would go for a QB in round 2 or later, keeping Campbell in as the QB until the rookie gains an understanding of what is required to be an NFL QB
vince young…lol really did not know he was a two time pro bowler. there’s hype for you. he is not even a top 10 qb and has never even won a playoff game.
and colt mccoy is a shadow of vince young even
by les boulez bomber on Mar 13, 2010 4:34 PM EST up reply actions
What the hell does this mean?
Why dont you just gay pride parade for JC to be traded?
There is never an agenda in a gay pride parade and I doubt they would march for a football player.
by Nobetterthenbob on Mar 13, 2010 9:42 AM EST up reply actions
Crap?
Wow, what caused that tirade? And what do gays have to do with who we pick in the draft. I think the reference was just the phrase, not the song or band. Anyway, if we only have the #4 pick, we have a really tough decision. I am one that would like to have a more promising QB than JC, but there is a good case to take a LT, particularly Okung, and keeping JC for another year (or more). The cheapest and easiest route, in accordance with Occam’s Razor. But I would go for Bradford if he was available, mainly based on an argument first mentioned by Tiller: we now have a high pick. The team is highly likely to do better this year, resulting in a much lower pick next year (15 or lower). The top QBs in any year go very high, so we can get one this year but not next year. I.e., this is a once in a decade opportunity – the highest pick we’re likely to have for many years, and thus the only opportunity to get a top rated QB. Too good to pass up. Some caveats: I’d go for Bradford, not necessarily Clausen (but would not object if that’s who Shanahan selected). And I’d like to have my cake and eat it, too: trade for high draft picks and use them all (or at least two) on O-line. Everybody says there are a lot of very promising O-linemen out there (including 7+ first round quality), and several guys mentioned special favorites, and some will certainly be available early in the second round. My guess is that we could live with what we have (or will get in FA) plus one good LT from the draft. Trade bait could be JC, Carter (because of the 3-4), maybe Landry or Rogers.
the lions and rams hae been picking high for years
by check703301 on Mar 13, 2010 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
I wonder why
One team has not drafted a 1st rd QB in decades, and the other just drafted one last year.
Think this may have something to do with the problem?
Maybe the lake is dried out...
The odds of the Skins keeping two QB`S if that is the case of drafting one with the 4th pick assuming Campbell has no takers is questionable. The money a QB will demand at # 4 will be outlandish. You all most have to start right away and not ride the bench so unless a miracle is going to happen with a trade I think the line will be the first pick. We are in the same boat as Seattle, Cleveland, ST.Louis but we have a better QB than them right now.
no i really do not. i think there is major organizational issues with both these teams. as there has been with the redskins. you do not perennially lose without front office ineptitude.
ironically, detroit drafted joey harrington #3 in 2002 and started him for four straight seasons. then they tried the other route, and started a superbowl winning qb for three years and focused on picking up stud receivers with their top 10 pick. they drafted three of them. last year they drafted another “franchise qb” #1. we will see. they have been searching for that franchise qb for 8 seasons and still do not know if they have one. after 18 crappy years, i am not interested in waiting to see if this years rookie “franchise qb” will be any good.
maybe they should try developing one in the background while they put the other pieces in place first. start having seasons with a winning record, winning the division and get to the divisional championship game. no qb can win it by themself any ways. and if you still do not have a franchise qb by that point, go sign a brett favre type.
the leash is short with this team after 18 crappy seasons, 10 under dan snyder
by les boulez bomber on Mar 13, 2010 4:54 PM EST up reply actions
Too funny
“…this personal written fellation of Sam Bradford” : That is funny. Now here’s my humble opinion on what the Skins should do: trade no.4 and Portis for more picks; grab Spiller and let the rebuilding begin!
by Clint_Didier_and_Donnie_Warren on Mar 13, 2010 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
Dude, grow up
I dont agree with the guys contention either, but argue on the merits of the argument
calling people douche’s, retarted, mentally challenged, is not acceptable
The great thing about this site is that generally other than a couple of exceptions (cough LJP cough) everyone on here treats the other posters with respect, even if they disagree with them, if you want to carry on like that go over to Redskins INsider
Pommylee
Bradford
is going to the Rams. And I’ll be damned if I want Clausen as my QB. We need o-line help in the worst way, why spend millions of dollars on a QB that will just struggle to stay upright.
No Thanks
What is this prose? Just say that you think we should draft Bradford if he’s on the board, no need for your poems and sappy writing.
You have also offered no solutions to our problems...
How can Bradford be successful behind the O-line we have right now?, He Can’t!
Draft a LT! Any one with any football sense can see this…
Pas, we do have a 2nd rd pick
and if Campbell is traded, we’ll probably have another. Thats enough ammo to grab a LT and a good RB, or 2 OT prospects.
I’m also sure there will be LT avaliable all throughout the 1st round next year as well. With QB’s, you never know.
true, but okung is thought to be the 5th best LT if he came out last year! it’s deep, not good
by les boulez bomber on Mar 13, 2010 4:56 PM EST up reply actions
Thats not exactly a ringing endorsment for Okung.
Bradford would have fought for the #1 QB spot had he come out last year. I believe he would have been taken over Stafford.
i think so too. but bradford really will not be there at #4. he will be signed by stl before the draft. count on it. the coach and gm are not going to lose their job over the matter
by les boulez bomber on Mar 14, 2010 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed.
Drafting Bradford or Claussen would be a mistake of epic proportions. On the positive side, however, tickets will be even easier to get if one of them is drafted at the #4 slot. People won’t pay for more of the same garbage.
by killianskid34 on Mar 15, 2010 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
We have set ourselves up to draft LT in round 1
In my opinion, I think that is exactly what they are going to do, barring a change soon. I am not here to argue my support for Campbell or such, I am just stating my opinion of the draft scenario. With no one who can competently play LT, arguably the most important position in the game after quarterback, while we have someone who may or may not have reached their peak, but is still at least in the middle of the pack, I think the way they will go is LT. Unless we trade for a LT or trade Campbell, I can’t help but think who would be more of a value to us now and in the future, and it is a LT.
LT in the First
QB to push Campbell and take over in the 2nd
A couple more Offensive lineman and a RB in the later rounds
Yup
I think you also watch out for trades. If we have some extra picks because of Rodgers, Carter, Davis/Cooley, or any other traded players, watch out for a FS like Rolle and a D-Linemen like Terrance Cody.
I will say though, Tiller, if Chris Samuels was here for at least one more year, I’d be just fine with going Bradford in the first, though I am still as much as a JC supporter as LJP, I would just learn to move on. I really don’t think though we are in the situation where we need a 1st round QB. IF we get 2 1st rounders by trade, then I see no problem in going QB/LT or LT/QB (preferably the latter), but our 1st round priority needs to be LT for the team.
Hopefully Seattle is more interested in Clausen or Bradford
They have 2 first rounders, a great team for the Redskins to swap with and pickup and extra 2nd
I would love ane extra 2nd
2nd round is the most important round. You can pick up people who fell through the cracks, grab some long-term talent and projects, and all kinds of stuff. You’ve got a great point, I would love that.
by BigOLinemen on Mar 13, 2010 10:33 AM EST up reply actions
I would prefer to trade for their 1st Rd this year and their 1st Rd next year
than to trade for their 2nd this year
Reason being
Jake Locker,
No Qb is cant miss this year, but Locker looks the real deal, and assuming Seatlle have another terrible year, their 2011 1st Rd pick may just be high enough to get him
Pommylee
Dr, why blow a 2nd on just an adaquate QB to push Campbell
when we can get a 1st rounder to replace him. These type of commentys lead me to believe you don’t want Campbell here for much longer, but are just not comfortable with Bradford. If what you wrote above is the case, I’d rather bypass QB all together and just stick with JC or wait until next year when we can just let JC become a FA, and get nothing in return for him, then get stuck whit whomever is avaliable as a QB when we draft, of take a chance on a FA QB.
This just doesn’t make sense.
So, we get rid of Colt in this scenario?
Just wondering, Doc. I can’t see us starting a season with JC, a rookie, and Colt as the only backup. Agree w/ the rest.
i think we are a wild card with suh on the board and okung gone at #4. and in a perfect position to trade down, which is what i think they will do.
by les boulez bomber on Mar 14, 2010 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions
If Suh or Gerald McCoy are still on the board, and Okung is not, I think we trade down.
There are lots of teams that would give up a couple of picks for one of those guys.
Serious business.
Yeah, and to also give us a face of the franchise, and a leader we can really behind both as a team and as fans.
I think after what we all had to go through over the last decade, this isn’t too much to aSK FOR IS IT?
Its posts like this
that show how stupid some fans are. Seriously Tiller56 do you actually follow the Redskins or…?
Why attack like that?
Tiller’s point was reasonable and he took the time to write up a nice post.
We need more people like Tiller who are willing to put the time into this community.
Maybe that was too harsh
but its not like we haven’t seen post after post like this here. Great, another flashy injury prone 1st round QB. The Redskins have tried this strategy before and failed in epic fashion. I just don’t understand how people think continuing to do things that way makes sense despite all the evidence to the contrary.
by SkinsOsTerps on Mar 13, 2010 1:26 PM EST up reply actions
but what is the failure:
Drafting a high round QB, or a failure to identify talent and use the talent correctly.
Campbell was a first round pick, and he would perform well in Gibb’s system but Gibbs went away from his system and then retired.
I agree the Redskin’s needs are on the OL, so now is not the time to address QB unless another way exists to fix the line
I don't think we should never pick a 1st round qb
only that
A. As you said, other needs are much more pressing and
B. People act like a flashy QB who did well in college is an automatic fix when the reality is that using a high pick on one is a high risk high reward gamble that shouldn’t be made based on nothing but hype.
I agree that success has as much to do with finding the right guy to fit your system and that needs to be the overriding consideration. Drafting a QB high when the backbone of your system is in shambles almost never makes sense.
by SkinsOsTerps on Mar 13, 2010 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Before you critize others
maybe try fixing your grammar. “I don’t think we should never” and “shouldn’t be made based on nothing but hype”. Common dude, really!
Sorry I don't go to great lengths to proofread
posts on a sports forum. I will say that if you’re going to bother criticizing someone’s grammar you should make a point to get word choices correct yourself. “Common dude, really!” I’m not sure what common dudes have to do with the post. :)
by SkinsOsTerps on Mar 13, 2010 6:19 PM EST up reply actions
I see you respond to,
but don’t post. Why don’t you put yourself out there by writing a post stating whatever it is that you feel passionate about this team. It’s easy to critize from a far, but try be the focal point for once.
By the way
like I said below, I don’t mind the critizism, I have enough to back up my opinions. I just don’t appreciate the personal attacks.
Not sure how my posting habits are relevant
By the way you misspelled “criticize”, just since I know you’re very concerned with that sort of thing. :)
by SkinsOsTerps on Mar 13, 2010 7:35 PM EST up reply actions
They're not relavent
Point was, it’s easy to attack when you have nothing on the line. Try turning the tables and having to defend youself from guys like yourself.
Maybe it's fans like you that truely don't know much about football.
Try respecting others and yourself and stop showing your ignorance. Simply disagreeing and expressing your opinion would have been good enough. You are giving a bad name to a great fan base, and making youirself look like an ass.
Yada yada yada
I’m not the one claiming with certainty that someone is going to be a “franchise quarterback”. There was virtually no nuance in the post and it sounds like something Danny himself would have written. If you want to hold on to this “one player away” nonsense then I don’t care but it has been said one too many times with this team to take it seriously.
by SkinsOsTerps on Mar 13, 2010 6:28 PM EST up reply actions
Re-read the post
there was never mention of certainy that Bradford will be a freachise QB. It is simply my opinion. I will agrue my opinion, but I don’t feel the need to attack someone personally inless that person shows no respect to me, and feels the need to attack me personally. You don’t know me, so don’t go making assumptions on my football knowledge based on something I wrote that you don’t agree with.
Maturity shows a lot about a person, and you lack there of shows me far more about you, than my opinions show you about me.
No certainty?
“Some lucky team is going to give him millions to become their next franchise quarterback, and face of the franchise. For a team like the Redskins, who are in desperate need for an identity, this could be a match made in Daniel Snyder heaven.”
Sounds pretty certain to me.
by SkinsOsTerps on Mar 13, 2010 7:29 PM EST up reply actions
Its certain he will be a high pick and get millions in the process
Where it that blurb did you get anything about my certainty of him living up to those expectations. I simply said he will be given the money to become that, whether or not he lives up to the challenge is beyond all of us.
imagine disagree as code for stupid. and disagree all you want. i really do not want to read anyone attacking another- even if the opinion is not well informed or thought out.
by les boulez bomber on Mar 14, 2010 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions
and i am not implying his was or wasnt. let’s just keep it clean guys. it isnt even our team or decision- lol
by les boulez bomber on Mar 14, 2010 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Some of you guys are being really harsh
It’s not like the guy is saying ‘jc sux lolz’ He has his opinion, we have ours. It is the life long argument: Offensive Line or Quarterback. A lot of teams will go QB first because they often last longer and go without injury longer, but it is easily arguable that Offensive Line is much more critical to the success of the team. It simply depends on your view, and whatever happens in the end, I personally support the new management. This year is a pretty lowly draft aside from defense, and we are pretty good defensively. They may want to look to O-line next year in a more fruitful draft, or decide to choose otherwise.
My opinion though is that Campbell is still a leader of this team and has not been utilized properly. I think Gibbs system was great for him and I think Shanahan’s system will be perfect for him. I think though he is his prime, he is going to show great improvement from other years, and that giving up on him now would be pointless. We give him another season and we can even increase his value if we want to trade him. There is no reason to give him up now.
I don't mind the criticism
if I did I wouldn’t have written this.
Thing is, there are pleanty of Redskins fans out there that believe we need a new QB. There are also pleanty or draft analysts that believe that Bradford is the best QB avaliable, and has the potential to be the #1 overall choice.
there's the rub
available….
he’s the best available…. doesn’t mean that he’d be #1 if Locker had come out, or that someone else may not develop and leave the “best available” guy as a rich understudy to someone else as he holds a clipboard and looks foolish going through the hand signals sending in a play.
QB evaluation is almost an artform…. measureables are one thing, performance is another, then you have to evalute whether the performance that you saw at the college level will translate to the pros. What about the offense that the team ran? what about the defenses that they faced? Hey, these guys are all decent enough to look good throwing balls through tires or to specific places on the field, it’s what they did in the game, with someone in their jock, how did they do then? It’s what I like about the mid major QB’s and the small school guys, they didn’t have the benefit of sitting behind a bunch of mammoth corn fed sentinels to where they could pick out someone in a spread offense that required a release within two seconds so that you never get touched. It’s easy to put up numbers in those scenarios but how well does that translate to three, five and seven step drops and passing in the pocket? calling audibles at the line and reading defenses and blitzes?
Bradford may be all that, perhaps he will be immediately, or perhaps with time to adjust to the pro game speed.
myself, I just don’t see it.
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
Thats a fair assessment piratedan
I believe Mike Shanahan is a good evaluater of QB talent, so if he chooses to select Bradford, I will definitly trust his decision.
If it says anything, there were NFL personall people who had Bradford ahead of Matt Stafford had he entered in 2009.
Also, I hear a lot of people mention Lockers name. To get him next year, we will likelu have to be picking in the top 5 spots. Those same poeple who have mentioned Lockers name are also ones who favor keeping Campbell. This I don’t understand. Those people must believe that Campbell isn’t the long-term answer. So is it some poeple who have felt strongly against drafting a QB this year just saying so because they don’t like Bradford, or are they saying so because they really like JC, and believe he is the QB of the future in DC.
Those who like Locker are going to have to endure another 4-12 season or worse to have a chance at drafting him without mortgaging any more draft picks to trade up. I say if certain coaches don’t believe in JC, we need to draft a QB now while we have a pick this high, because we all know we don’t want to be drafting in the top 5 for long.
I may be misunderstanding something,
but it seems like you really like Bradford. If his is true then I have a question; if we had gone 8-8 and were picking at #16, would you have rather us gone 4-10 so we could pick Bradford? Just curious
Tough question
No, I never hope for us to loose, no matter what the ramifications. I would advocate trying to trade up to get him, but I certainly wouldn’t want to mortgage our future by doing so.
I do really like Bradford, and I don’t even think he has reached his potential. I think he can and will be a special NFL QB.
not if we trade for a terrible teams 2011 1st rounder
Those who like Locker are going to have to endure another 4-12 season or worse to have a chance at drafting him without mortgaging any more draft picks to trade up
I know its hard to be sure who will be terrible, but if we trade our #4 pick for a number 2 and next years 1st Rounder (which we may have the chance to do as the overnight rejigging of Draft boards in the new draft sched will make our 2nd Rd pick very enticing) or we trade down with Seattle if they want Clausen and take their late first rounder this year and their 1st Rounder next year, then we can keep Campbell for 1 year, see if he thrives in Shannys system, if he does, great then we have 2 1st Rounders next year to really build a team of the future, and if he doesnt, we still ahve them 2 1st Rounders next year that we can use on Locker, if we need to trade up, or can use on Locker and BPA if we dont need to trade up
Pommylee
the thing is that college qbs really do not show if they can read defenses or not. and we also do not know if they can make adjustments. and those are necessary skills that all great qbs share. so you are always taking a leap of faith on a crucial skill.
by les boulez bomber on Mar 14, 2010 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions
The spread is used so college QBs do not have the opportunity
to develop such skills. CB and Colt McCoy are cases in point. Tiller has mentioned Bradford’s experience in his red shirt freshman season under the center, yet most of his experience is with the long snap as well. Peyton Manning has demonstrated the need to both well in the NFL game particularly in the playoff game against the Jets.
by Jefferson1935 on Mar 15, 2010 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Draft O-line
My reasoning is like college 101. The Jets have an awesome O-line and a defense that you have to like. We are going to say Sanchez is in a good system a rookie last year who did not have to throw that much. He would have failed in Washington for obvious reasons, management wanted him here and I am glad it did not work out. At one time the during the 80`s the Redskins used the draft and built a super bowl team they must of had a tremendous scouting staff ( Art Monk-Dexter Manly-Charles Mann-Russ Grimm-Mark May) the list goes on. They already had a QB and just filled the holes with great prospects. We know are needs are on the O-line why in the hell would anyone being a Skins fan not want to have a drafted star with the #4 pick. I understand everyone wants the next Peyton Manning but get over it I don`t see any QB being sucessfull with the state of our offense right now. Campbell is the answer for now unless a trade comes up that we just can`t turn down.
nicely written...
but if we neglect the need to build the trenches in a deep draft like this years i would think drafting any young QB in any round would end up being a mistake and imminent injuries after watching that beating JC took last year…..we dont need bradford we need a pocket to throw in….and if we draft clausen the new regime has failed us before our team steps on the field….O-LINE!!!!!!!!!
Dorothy Mantooth is a saint!!!
by Tony J. on Mar 13, 2010 1:24 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Exactly get the big guys first..
Since they are as of now no young guys to build around. We are more than one player away from getting any better.
My opinion is that Shanahan has already decided.....
to move in another direction with the QB position. I believe QB is the most important position on the team, and that they should grab the best one they can get. I personally feel that Bradford is the best QB, and should be targeted. Shanahan will make that decision, and probably doesn’t even know exactly who he wants yet. I think Claussen actually fits his style, but Bradford would be a better fit for Kyle’s system. I think he will lean on Kyle, and they will jointly decide.
I also believe that LT is the 2nd most important position, and Is the Team’s greatest need. There are solid Tackles who will be available in the 2nd, also a possible trade for Gaither. They could still draft a LT in the 1st and a QB in the 2nd, anything is possible.
Unless they sign Jason to a deal prior to the draft, I feel strongly they will draft a QB in the 1st.
If the Skins picked up Gaither
before the draft, even sometime next week, the QB or LT discussion would come to a near halt. Not that RT would be the next focus of discussion. With 11 OL signed and on the roster at least two of them will go with after suitable LT on the picked up in free agency or the draft. Ten OL are the high side.
by Jefferson1935 on Mar 13, 2010 6:40 PM EST up reply actions
Yea, the 4th and 37th picks seem destined to go QB-LT or vice-versa.
barring any deals or new contracts.
RT can be looked at in the 4th and 5th round.
I think they will carry 11 O-linemen.
by johnnydee83 on Mar 13, 2010 10:18 PM EST up reply actions
you are probably right on all accounts but forget bradford. he is going to stL! i also think that JC sticks around another year even though shan might like to see an upgrade. this much i know, if you show up to an nfl game with a glaring hole, it will be exploited and you will not win more than 5 games. the offensive line, any way you slice it, is a glaring hole. and i think there are some question marks on several other positions that might be exposed as glaring holes if they arent addressed.(secondary, lb coverage, and rb)
by les boulez bomber on Mar 14, 2010 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions
I think they believe they have the players for the O-line now.
Except for LT of course. They have 2 centers, 4 guys to battle for RT, and 3 guys for RG. I think they will sign UDFA and released guys.
I do think Bradford goes #1, and Okung #2.
by johnnydee83 on Mar 14, 2010 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Several of the o-line players have versatility at more than one position.
Edwin Williams, Will Montgomery, and Kory Lichtensteiger have center experience at the college level and guard at the pro level. Mike Williams is listed as G/T. I don’t see a viable RT for pass protection, because neither M. Williams or Heyer could handle the pass rush.
by Jefferson1935 on Mar 15, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Nice post Tiller, I like that song myself.
I saw the Scorpions back in the day, and that was the ultimate lighter song. Chicks dug that………good times.
No problem Till. The Bradford thing gets people fired up.
Personally, I think both Bradford and Okung will be gone when the 4th pick comes up.
The argument will probably shift to: Claussen-Bulaga/Williams.
I really feel that way.
IMO, the only way to get either is via trade-up.
by johnnydee83 on Mar 13, 2010 10:19 PM EST up reply actions
or if that happens
trade down and allow someone who is enamored with McCoy or Berry or Claussen to come up and get them.
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
if that happens then suh or mccoy will still be available. it is the perfect scenario to trade down. and if they do not want to do that, then take him. both of them, individually, are rated as best in the last several years. so take them and trade whoever you need to trade to get a draft pick back. orakpo is the only untouchable player on the roster, which says a lot.
by les boulez bomber on Mar 14, 2010 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Orakpo, Haynesworth, Hall, and either Landry/Horton are long term....
for defense. Offense is only the 2 young receivers and either Cooley/Davis.
That to me is 7 players to build around for the future. I think they will give the other young players on the roster a good look this year, and evaluate them. Next year they start the real rebuilding process.
by johnnydee83 on Mar 14, 2010 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions
The free agency and replacement level players.
I think it stinks that they Skins have not yet moved on picking up quality offensive linemen in free agency as yet. 2011 is not soon enough. Greg Trippiedi has done a fairly complete analysis of the Skins problem at OT since 2007. He discusses replacement level players concept – http://redskinshogheaven.com/2010-articles/march/the-real-reason-that-talent-surplus-doesnt-reflect-in-winning-percentage.html – and the unique aspect of offensive tackles in the NFL. He brings this issue to a head and says “The one thing that replacement level offensive tackles have that no other position has to worry about is that they cannot be hidden by the scheme.” This agrees with the notion that OTs are next to QBs in importance to an NFL team – the foundation of offenses. Johnny, I think you would agree with most of the Trippiedi article.
by Jefferson1935 on Mar 15, 2010 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions
This is really entertaining
Because there will never be a consensus pick for LT and QB barring a trade, big signed, etc.. Most of us won’t sway either way, and can not sway the other side. So, I would like to ask a question to anyone who supports the 1st Round QB move: Why is it so dire that we have to go QB this year instead of giving Campbell one more year in a proven system?
Maybe that’s why I can not even fathom drafting a QB, because there is a gaping hole at LT and I all I want is the best, and I just don’t see why we can’t go Campbell one more year, then, assuming he fails at being the QB we need, why we can’t grab a Jake Locker by making a big push draft wise, or any other QB that emerges.
You answered my part for me
Because everyone says just gine Campbell 1 MORE YEAR. Why not give him a contract extension for 4-5 more years? This is the year to do it right? Obviously someone had their doubts about him as the future QB id this team. I will give you my 2 reasons why, after stating all the above, I feel like we need to get the QB now:
1.) There is no guarantee we will be picking high enough next year to get Locker, or Mallett or Devlin, or whomever will be the top ranked QB. You mentioned trading up, but why mortgage our future with valuable draft picks when we all know they are so valuable. Why not get the QB this year while we are picking this high; who knows when we may be in this situation again.
2.) Campbell still;s gives us some leverage in a trade. If he becomes an unrestricted FA next year, all the leverage is his. If he has value to another team, trade him and take a pick in return, then we can draft or QB of the future
2a) I really think Bradford is going to be great.
We don't know if Campbell will be a UFA next year
we have no idea what the CBA will be. If it is like it is now we could franchise him or put another tag on him. There is also the possibility that the third or 4th best QB next year is as good a prospect as Bradford. Tough for me to remember any year where the #1 QB had such serious injury concerns.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 7:32 PM EST up reply actions
If we have a lower pick next year
that means we improved. IF we improved, then JC improved, and that means the problem is solved right?
Thats tough to say
First of all we need to define the improvement. Are we talking 6-10, 8-8 or 10-6? That will provide more answers to your question.
It is possible other aspects of our game like special teams, and defense turnovers come into an improved record. Campbell may never get better, and he also could very well take a jump to the next level. We just don’t know. All we can judge him on is his body of work up to this point, and all that suggests is that he’s right around average.
Is average going to be good enough?
Lets go with 8-8
As far as average being good enough, I have four words for you: Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer. Also, will an average, 2nd round LT be good enough to protect Bradford, or (God forbid( Clauson from DeMarcus Ware (or whoever is lined up against him)? Now I’m not saying that your wrong in your belief, but I’d rather not wait 2-3 yrs for the rookie to develope when we could use those 2-3 yrs with an already developed QB.
Charles Brown is a pretty darn good LT prospect
if he’s there in the second, I believe he can certainly do the job. There is nothing to say that Okung will be better. 1st round OT can be busts too(mandrich, gallary to name a few).
Just for the sake of our discussion
I’m all for us keeping Campbell is the staff believes in him. I just don’t see the signs of them believing in him.
Don’t keep the guy in limbo. If you don’t want him as a QB, trade him to a team that does, and take a pick and get additional help for our team.
That would work
I like JC and want him to succeed. If that means he has to leave, so be it, but I’d rather he do it in D.C. (Landover if you wanna get technical).
tiller- bradford is not going to be there at #4 for us. if you want me to hedge it, he is very very very unlikely to be there at #4. STL absolutely needs and their fans are screaming for a QB.
so with bradford off the table, what would you do? sign clausen even though brady quinn has stunk?
by les boulez bomber on Mar 14, 2010 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Draft Solution...
Trade down and get 2 first round picks, draft B. Campbell, and Bulaga, 2nd round draft Vladmir Ducasse (entire O-Line is solved).. Pick up veteran reliable QB or give Colt Brennan a shot, if you we can’t find a franchise QB draft Jake Locker next year.. Problem solved…
Ummm....
I don’t really think any team with two late first round picks will trade up to get one first round pick. The only team that would have done that is the Cerrato run Skins. I still think JC is the best fit at QB. Draft Okung first, get a QB or RB in the second round.
I would see if anyone would take a trade on Cooley for a 2nd and 3rd round pick. Then draft a Guard and another Tackle with those picks.
That could be ideal
but the trade down could be tough to achieve. Also, as previously mentioned, we don’t know where we are going to be picking next year, so the Locker talk could all be a moot point, just as all the Bradford talk could be this year if he is taken first by the Rams.
I do however like your approach, and would completely support it if the staff we just able to committ to JC for the long term.
how long ago was that.
Patrick Ramsey was another. Some consider campbell to be another. There is no doubt that certain decisions haven’t always been the right ones. That can’t scare us from drafting someone. If we do so, we become the Lions or the Rams.
Change is comming one way or another. If it isn’t at QB it will be on the O-line, and there is no guarantee that that will work either.
I want to see all of the key positions addressed this year
QB, OG, OT, FS, and RB. CB, LB, and DL could also be addressed assuming Rodgers/Carter are traded out and give us more picks. I want Preferably, I want to see a 1st OT, 2nd QB, 4th OG, 5th FS, and a 7th RB, but I can pretty much deal with switching up 1st and 2nd, and 4th, 5th, and 7th. I think it is key that we get a good O-linemen, and I tell you, if Bruce Campbell drops to 2nd round, I would be A-okay with Bradford, but I am very picky this year with my O-Line, and there are only a few prospects I really think can make a strong, immediate impact. QB wise I think Bradford and Clausen can both start day one, but the only one I want is Bradford.
Maybe this is my second issue: I love the idea of a good, project QB, more then a project O-linemen. An o-linemen should never be a project, while QBs, because of their ability to be so varied in skill and technique, is just fine. I’d be fine if we traded down and drafted Tebow late 2nd, early 3rd and even lower, because I’m okay with a project, but maybe that is the difference. Tiller, you probably don’t want to take a big risk at QB, you’d rather grab someone who you know will be successful, while me, I’d rather the same in an O-linemen.
I love these discussions man…
I love these discussions too bro.
Man, I almost thought I had you coming around to the Bradford side earlier in your post : )
I believe any QB is a risk, I don’t care who they are. Some are just less risky than others.
Bradford isn't the end of the world for me
But like I just said man, probably the only guy after Okung that I like, is Bruce Campbell. And I probably would like Bradford-Campbell about as much as I like Okung-Any project QB, but I don’t think we have a chance to get Campbell barring getting a late 1st rounder, though, amazingly, his stock has dropped (because of other guys raising). But you will be hard-pressed me to take Bradford over Okung unless I know we are gonna snag Campbell, because I think Campbell has higher potential then Okung, once he stops playing so wild and gets his technique down.
But, again, unless I know we have Campbell in the bag, I am not okay with drafting Bradford. But please, I love being convinced otherwise.
Truth be told
I haven’t looked at him very much. I need to, but I’ve only really broken down Okung/Davis/Campbell. I wanted to look over Charles Brown, Bryan Buluga, Trent Williams, and Ciron Black, but I haven’t gotten to it. Aside from Ciron Black, those guys are three great other prospects, while I am still not convinced Black is as bad as he looked in the Senior Bowl.
But yeah…I need to get my scout on a little more…sad when BigOLinemen is more familiar with the quaterback class then the offensive line class…
by BigOLinemen on Mar 13, 2010 10:18 PM EST up reply actions
If you feel up to it, these guys are worth a look and probable 2nd rd pick.
Rodger Saffold
Vladimir Ducasse
Jared Veldheer
Black is 4-5th round, Capers is 3rd.
by johnnydee83 on Mar 13, 2010 10:28 PM EST up reply actions
Fixed it for ya...
Bradford Jason Campbell is one of the most accomplished quarterbacks in the history of the Big12 SEC. His record setting Heisman year of 2008 2004 SEC Player of the Year season was nothing short of amazing. He has shown the moxy that few of his age and experience have, and is a proven winner. He does, however, come with some concerns. He was injured early in the 2009 season, when his shoulder was crushed by nearly 300lbs of weight from a jarring hit he sustained during a game. His season ended abruptedly, and all were left to second guess his future. But now with a clean bill of health, and the resume to go along with it, his rise and fall should be catapulted yet again with an early round draft selection in the 2010 2005 NFL draft.
Serious business.
To quote an infamous philly fan ...
“WE DON”T WANT HIM!!! WE DON"T WANT HIM! SEND HIM BAAAACK!!! SEND HIM BAAACK."
*Note that Bradford is not McNabb, he cannot escape pressure all by himself and make something out of nothing.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
