Using our 2nd on a Restricted FA Left Tackle via Trade?
by Tiller56 on Mar 13, 2010 5:22 PM EST
Email
PrintSince we've been going back and forth for months about 1st rd QB vs 1st rd LT(basically bradford vs okung), lets take a look at another scenerio that has been mentioned, but could also be an option for our LT needs.
I feel from reading and discussing some of these topics with a lot of you, that people are not sold on JC, but don't want to draft a QB until we address our OL. So, as this has been mentioned by a few on this board, as well as some respected NFL analysts, how about a trade involving a restricted FA LT?
Both Gaither from the Ravans and McNeil from the Chargers are options that may be avaliable via trade. For Gaither, our 2nd rd pick, and a player(maybe Moss), could possibly get a deal done. For McNeil, I imagine the same scenerio, our second and a player(not sure who they would want) could move a deal forward. Both of these players could be gone next season via unrestricted FA, so these teams could be smart to get a pick for them now.
If this were to take place, we could still move JC to re-gain that 2nd rd pick via another trade. Or, we could elect to keep JC and select a future QB in the first or go with a guy like Spiller in the first.
Thoughts.
201 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
In a heartbeat for the second and Carlos, Reed, Horton, Moss
but would wanna reduce the pick substantially for a guy like Thomas, or one of the TE’s, or Jarmon. I’d especially do it if we could agree to it before our first round pick. That way we have the option to trade down with the #4 or use it on BPA whether it be Bradford or whoever.
Bradford is suppose to move up his pro day.
Whether his injured shoulder is healed should be known after he throws on well then. Drew Brees has done well passing after surgery on his throwing arm and others have not.
by Jefferson1935 on Mar 13, 2010 7:04 PM EST up reply actions
He moved his Pro Day back
so it wouldn’t interfere with the Owners Meetings. He said he is 100% healed.
Yeah possibly
My thought on the whole Bradford thing is that I don’t think it is really possible to accurately predict how a QB will make the transistion to the NFL. Gladwell’s article basically put words to how I felt about picking QB’s. I have no real thoughts on Bradford but I would much rather trade down from the #4 in that scenario. That being said I can see arguments for taking him and if he fell and he gave Shanny a really good feeling I wouldn’t argue with it too hard. But I also wouldn’t argue with them if they took Okung or Berry or either of the DT’s.
I like JC and feel we can succeed with him and there is always the chance that he either takes his game to another level due to (O-line, Coaching, actually having weapons, etc) or next year an up an coming young backup becomes available for less than the #4 pick or Shanny see someone he really likes next year’s draft. So basically the only reason I can see to draft Bradford is if Shanny just feels incredible about him which I can’t really know. I don’t buy into the “Gotta draft a QB while we pick this high logic” Whenever Shanny see’s something he really likes whether it be this year or next year in whatever round do it. Don’t do it just to do it and I like probably everyone else has no freaking clue as to how Bradford will do.
I have a feeling Bradford will be gone though and I def. would not trade up for him. I’m hoping he see’s someone he likes in a later round and we develop him for a year or 2.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/12/15/081215fa_fact_gladwell
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 7:09 PM EST up reply actions
Interesting article, and helps explain the dilemma of the annual draft.
That article was about quarterbacks, but it could have easily been about any position.
Every year in every draft we see 1st round guys bust, and 6th round guys stand out.
Heck, Michael Jordan was cut from his HS basketball team because he wasn’t skilled enough. The trouble with evaluating 18-21 year old kids is not knowing how they will respond in the following ‘grown-up’ years. Some get freak injuries, some lose their motivation, some just peaked and have no further room for growth. There is no discernable way to evaluate what any person will be in the future, football or otherwise.
Teams and all evaluators do their best to assess an indidual’s talents, and they project the future based on their past research, knowledge, and gut instinct. It’s as much luck as it is skill and talent.
Look at Stephen Strasburg, as much of a sure thing as there is. Right now he has as good a chance to bust as he does to even be an average pitcher.
A simple exercise: if you have kids or know any, try to project what they will be like in 5 years, it’s virtually impossible. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don’t.
Micheal jordan actually was cut becauser he wasn’t tall enough.
by lynxtheone on Mar 13, 2010 10:52 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I disagree
That article was about quarterbacks, but it could have easily been about any position.
I get what your saying, but I get the feeling (and I have not investigated this) that positions like Tackle and Guard seem to have a much higher strike rate of getting a successful multi year starter when you draft them in the first round, mainly due to their required abilitys being very measurable, Strength for example, Weight etc
Whereas QB is very difficult to accurately measure.
Still I get where you are coming from, I just think the skill positions other than RB are the tougher ones to draft, WR’s are often busts (though this could be due to teams picking that high not having good enough QB’s or Lines to let them complete their routes, I am sure Manning and Brady behind their current O-Lines could make most WR’s look good) QB’s are often busts.
But Running Backs, easitly measureable Speed and Strength, plus limited difference in seeing a hole, cutting and running between college and the Pro game seem to be much surer bets
Typed all this in a real hurry, hope it makes sense
Pommylee
yeah but think about it this way
McNeil was a second round pick and Gaithers was undrafted. With enough scouting why cant we find our own McNeil or Gaithers. With such a deep draft why give away a pick and a player. Build through the draft, not through the trade market.
I agree with you Jean
I have been saying for weeks that we can and should be able to find our LT in the 2nd rd. I was trying to gain a little more perspective as to how everyone feels about this, as it seems I am one of few for drafting a QB in the first.
I don't know about that
Gaither was drafted with a 5th rounder in the supplemental. Couldn’t you say pretty much the same thing about QB’s? Drew Brees was a 2nd rounder and Brady a 6th. By your logic couldn’t you turn up a QB with enough scouting in rounds 2-6? I would give away a pick and a player if the player doesn’t concern me like carlos or one of our 3 SS’s and I thought the guy was worth a late first rounder. For either of them I would say they have late first round market value so would consider a second and a extraneous player a good value.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 7:14 PM EST up reply actions
Giving away a good pick and a player could prove to be more beneficial for the other team rather than us
imagine we give them Carlos roger, a solid cover corner and our second round pick. In that second round whatever team we traded with drafts a pro bowl left tackle with our pick. How would that make you feel? Rogers is worth a second round pick himself. Wouldnt it be more sensible to trade him and have to second round picks to work with? All these players that are stars were drafted at one point. Why can’t we be the team to draft them?
by JeanBaptiste on Mar 14, 2010 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions
man you are really attached to one more year of Rogers
He won’t be here after this season anyways and does not have 2nd round market value.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 14, 2010 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree....
Rogers has become a malcontent. He will not resign here……so why not get value for him now and try to find the solution now? I know people chirp on Barnes….but he hasn’t come closing to proving he is a starting corner yet. I hope he is….but has yet to be proven. By snagging Gaither….it fills a major hole….and although it creates a new one….all we need is for Barnes to step up…..or watch for who all is cut after the draft and in training camp. There will be corners to snag.
didnt you read
I’m suggesting we trade Carlos for a draft pick. Also if Carlos wasn’t worth at least a second round pick then why would Bruce Allen even bother tendering him with a first round. That doesn’t make sense. I find it unlikely that Shanahan drafts a quarterback with the fourth overall pick unless he believes that quarterback is the real deal. In fourteen years as the Broncos head coach he only drafted a quarterback in the first round once. So It seems more likely that he would draft a lineman with that pick. Either way my point is to give Shanahan the most picks and talent to work with as possible. He’s one of those guys that has success building through the draft.
by JeanBaptiste on Mar 15, 2010 4:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Carlos's tender was cheap...it doesn't mean he is worth that much like Heyer isn't worth a second rounder
That tender doesn’t mean he won’t be traded for a 4th rounder or lower later. If we trade a guy we tendered it will most likely be for pennies on the dollar.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 15, 2010 8:36 AM EDT up reply actions
Gaither is a proven LT but McNeill has not been as consistent.
Gaither has shown his ability at LT even against the Steelers in the 2008 and 2009 seasons. No rookie has passed this test. An early first round LT is a fairly safe pick yet has not played against NFL talent.
by Jefferson1935 on Mar 13, 2010 7:12 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think there is any way the Chargers trade McNeil.
Gaithers is attainable and would be an outstanding Left Tackle. I will gladly trade a 2 and a moderate player for him.
Tough to tell
They tendered only the first round tender not the first and a third meaning they are open to a trade. It seems they would take just a first. It has been rumored they would consider a 2nd rounder and we do have a high one.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 7:41 PM EST up reply actions
Thats what I was thinking too
I know they signed Boldin, but do you think they would be interested in Moss.
They are taking a flyer on Stallworth and brought back Mason so that might be alot of old WR's
They need alot of secondary help which is why I can see Carlos or Reed or Horton being an option.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 8:05 PM EST up reply actions
Why Tills?
He’s got hands of stone and he’s often out of position. And the fact that he’s getting his poke-a-dot panties in a bunch because he was tendered, makes him even more of a pain.
Barnes looks like he's coming along.
Though, I can’t say that I’m ready to roll the dice on him. And with Smoot being cut, we’re getting thin at CB. I see the Whitner deal coming to fruition if they do decide to let Rogers go. Is Whitner a cover corner? I have no idea.
I don't see any way Rogers is here after this season anyways.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 8:33 PM EST up reply actions
Then maybe they'll line Barnes up and give him help over the top.
I may be reaching, but I think Rogers is gonna talk himself right outta Washington. I mean, Shanny has coached “great” CB’s. Rogers is nowhere near that caliber now.
I like Barnes a lot.
Whittner, eventhough he came into the league as a corner, has been a safety recently.
No, I think they will get a 1st though.
They won’t make a move until draft day. As the draft is going, teams like Arizona, Indy, Dallas, Green Bay may panic if their Tackle gets picked. They will gladly trade for Gaither. I expect a bunch of trades draft day, and think Gaither gets swallowed up with a 1st. There’s always hope though.
If we used our second on a guy who turned out to be Gaither I would be ecstatic.
So I don’t mind swapping a pick for a proven 23 yo player. I’d throw in another guy if I wasn’t super attached to him. PLus being able to trade down might net us more picks giving us more overall value for our draft.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 7:18 PM EST up reply actions
Agree with the 2nd plus player for Gaither.
If we couldn’t trade back in the 1st, and Bradford, McCoy and Suh were all gone, where would we go with that pick? I really don’t think we need Berry that much. Could we take a flier on Spiller?
yeah I would be open to anything really even Okung honestly.
It would be alot of money for 2 tackles but I would feel good about it for 10 years. Spiller sounds nice. I’d be surprised after LJ. What else is ther on the board that is defensible at the #4 pick.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 7:39 PM EST up reply actions
I guess one of the two between Okung and Gaither could go to RT
giving us one hell of a potential tackle tandem for years. That would be pretty sweet.
since they both can play LT
that would allow us to fill out the rest of the line on mid round picks at G,C, and RT really in the future saving our high picks for other elements of the team.. Total luxury but I wouldn’t complain.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 8:07 PM EST up reply actions
I guess I wouldn't either
My great hope here would be JC really steps his game up to the next level. If not, were are no further ahead than we are now.
There are enough ways to get a good QB outside of a #4 pick.
If we solidified the O-line for the next 5-6 years thats alot ahead. Plenty of great QB’s in the league last year who came outside of a top 10 pick.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 8:32 PM EST up reply actions
I am not sure Shanahan wants a good QB.
Otherwise he would have already locked Campbell up.
IMO of course.
Look at the top 10 Qb's in passer rating last year
Only 2 (P. Manning and Rivers) Were top 10 picks
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 8:49 PM EST up reply actions
only 4 of the top 15 I believe as well
with JC being the 15th.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 8:56 PM EST up reply actions
Of course, Romo and Warner were undrafted,
and Brady was a 6th. Statistically speaking a 1st rd Qb has the greatest chance for success, followed by 2nd round. After that an undrafted has as good a chance as a 3,4,5,6,7th round pick.
The question is if you were going to draft a QB, wouldn’t you take one with the highest rate of success?
And that's the Catch-22, Johnny.
Deciphering who has that greatest chance in the first round. Some say “whoever ran a pro-style offense”. Some say smarts. Some say size. It’s such a gamble, and a lot of money in the process.
Plus, let’s be real. If Locker was coming out this year, how far would these “so-called” future prospects have dropped? If you ask me, he’s better than the top four from this year. Do you wait on a guy like that, or take what you think is the best option this year?
Locker is very raw
but is a heck of an athlete. Bradford is definitly the better QB right now(taking away his injury of course).
Lockers upside is high, but I would say it’s no higher than Bradfords.
Bradford should have been a Lion.
He definately would have been drafted ahead of Stafford had he come out when he was expected to.
Go youtube Sam Bradford
Make sure to get some clips from the 2008 season(his heisman year). He lost his best WR(Kelly) the year before. He had Iglasis as his go to that year. His intangibles are amazing.
disagree
shotgun on every pass ive seen in his highlight. it was more so his receivers hiughlights then his
by back_to_the_future on Mar 15, 2010 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions
I am not so sure Locker would be...
the highest rated QB in this class.
He was highly propped up due to Bradford’s injury and the questions about Claussen.
As the real evaluating has taken place only recently, Locker stood to lose ground.
Many scouts say that Locker needs the extra year.
I think he would have been the "Cutler" of this year's draft.
The guy who “awed” every at the combine and moved up the boards. Maybe he wouldn’t over take Bradford. But then Bradford and Claussen didn’t throw at the combine either.
Thing I like about Bradford is
he didn’t have to grow into his position. He earned it as a red-shirted freshmen, and was good. As a soph he was great. Kid hasn’t even touched his potential yet.
so if you are saying that there are four legitimate first round QB prospects next year, I would def wait to draft a QB until next year and solidify the two tackle spots with our 1st and 2nd rounders this year. we will still absolutely be picking in the top 15 and prob top 10 next year. our schedule is really brutal.
personally, i think it is always wise to look a year out to see what is likely to be available when planning for this year’s draft
by les boulez bomber on Mar 16, 2010 6:59 AM EDT up reply actions
There is a huge difference between First rounder and top 10 pick
Tiller seems to feel we HAVE to take a QB now cuz we might not pick as high in the near future. The simple fact is quite often the best QB from a draft class doesn’t come from the top 10. It could very well turn out that the third QB available next year turns out way better than Bradford. Picking a QB in the top 10 is no guarantee of success. If Bradford give’s Shanny a, for lack of a better term “Coaching Boner”, then sure go for it. But there should be no artificial pressure to take a QB just cuz we are picking high and might have higher draft picks in the future. There is just no legitimacy to that argument.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 14, 2010 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Bay
That, thats not how I view our QB situation at all. I believe that Bradford is that special type of QB you only see every so often. I certainly don’t feel that way about Clausen, and some have him rated higher(yet I believe those people are on crack). I am not saying we need a QB this year, I saying that if we are not sure on Campbell, we need to make a play for Bradford. If the staff likes Campbell, then I’m all for moving on, but I don’t feel that is the case.
I do believe Bradford will be heads and tails above Campbell after a year or two in the league.
glad you clarified bec i always thought you were draft the qb regardless. i agree that IF we feel that highly on the guy and IF he is available, go for it. personally, i have not been sold but i have also not really evaluated him. from what i read about the concerns, they seem legitimate. regardless, i am 95% confident he signs with STL before the draft starts- which leaves us thinking about clausen who really takes a hit because brady quinn has stunk it up so bad- a consistent 65 QB rating every year for three straight years!
by les boulez bomber on Mar 16, 2010 7:03 AM EDT up reply actions
Okung is going to get 6 yr/60M as a 4. Gaither wants similar dollars.
Can’t afford to pay for 2 LTs. It’s like paying for 2 starting QBs.
That’s why Baltimore has to find a new home for him.
Assuming the cap comes back, which I think it definately will.
LT is the new QB.
Top LTs make 9-12M/yr, RTs make 4-5M/yr. Gaither considers himself an elite Tackle, and he is.
NT is also becoming the new LT.
Scarcity of top talent, supply and demand.
Doesn't it bother you
having to give hat much money for a 1st RD LT, when they don’t even touch the ball at all
not one bit
I’d rather do that than take a much bigger gamble on a QB.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 9:05 PM EST up reply actions
thing is they can both be great, or they can both be busts
I would rather risk the great on a QB who has more control over the outcome of the game.
On the other side of that coin,
is Jonathen Ogden. He solidified that run first line for many years.
I just see a LT in the top 10 having way less bust potential
So if I have to give out a huge contract sight unseen I would have no problem giving it to a LT who is way more likely to be a contributing player. Not to mention you will always get more value from a LT than a QB in a strictly financial sense. How many QB’s come in and play at an elite level their first couple years? In terms of bang for your buck you would get more from a LT as opposed to a QB who won’t be playing up to his pay until he’s about ready for a new contract. Not saying that should be a factor but I have no problems giving that much money to a LT who you right off as “don’t even touch the ball at all”
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 14, 2010 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
When you get down to the financial aspect of it.
It would be wiser to pay Gaither 10M/yr then Okung.
Gaither is a known commodity, and still getting better.
Okung is an unknown, and could bust.
Very true.
And at 23, you’d rather get someone whom you KNOW can handle the job for many years to come.
i they signed gaither, i dont think they use the #4 on a tackle. but i do think they use a 2nd rounder for one. and since we are trading our 2nd round in this theoretical trade, it means i think they make a second trade to get a pick back.
by les boulez bomber on Mar 16, 2010 7:06 AM EDT up reply actions
agreed. he is young and proven…big difference from what we did in the past
by les boulez bomber on Mar 16, 2010 7:06 AM EDT up reply actions
I think we should keep our draft picks but
both of those LT’s are worth a 2nd rounder…problem occurs when you get players involved. Would I giveup Moss…absolutely not, nor would I give up Horton or Rogers. I would on the other hand trade them Cooley or Landry.
by mr.snyderhireme on Mar 13, 2010 8:19 PM EST reply actions
+100
I wouldn’t trade Moss either. That would thin us out at Receiver, experience wise. We need him, at LEAST, to mentor Thomas, Kelly, Mitchell. Cooley is an option. Davis has proven that he’s a reliable TE, and he’s getting paid a nice bit of change to be the #2.
I was at one time for a Cooley trade
but now I see it as a weapon we can use to our advantage; two athletic TE, that can’t be covered by a LB. This opens things up for 1 on 1 matchups with our WR’s.
Yes, I agree.
But if we’re talking trade’s that make other teams lick their chops, Cooley is the one.
Two athletics TE's
that defenses aren’t going to bother to cover and neither could can block, comon Tiller you’re better than this
by mr.snyderhireme on Mar 14, 2010 4:08 AM EST up reply actions
Oh, besides...
They just brought in another blocking TE. Something’s going on with this scenario. We’re at the brink of too many on the roster.
the other guy could just be a replacement for yoder
I’d rather lose Moss than one of the TE’s.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 8:54 PM EST up reply actions
DT, MK, MM,
Supplemented with a low cost vet, and another spot for a special teamer and maybe take a chance on someone like Limas Sweed. Then I would use alot of 2 TE’s and get them a combined 100 catches or so.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 13, 2010 9:03 PM EST up reply actions
Speaking of ST,
That’s a “need” of ours as well, now that we let Rock Cartwright go. I think Shanahan should really consider Spiller for both the RB needs, and the special teams needs. That would be niccceeeeee…..
Totally forgot about him.
Yeah, I guess he’s our guy there. But seeing how Shanahan gambled on Eddie Royal, I wouldn’t say it’s a stretch for him to trade down for C.J. One things for sure, if he drafted him, he sure would know how to use him.
Damn right!
Hello DeSean. Hello Austin. Hello S. Smith.
Meet Mr. Spiller. That would be awesome.
Thomas as the 1
Kelly and mitchell as the 2 and 3. Davis or Cooley lineing up in the slot from time to time.
In this situation it would allow as to only have to carry 4 WR on the roster
as the two TE’s are almost like having 2 additional WR’s. We could carry an extra linemen of RB in this scenerio.
Mitchell is the only wildcard for me.
Just haven’t seen enough from him. Not that that’s his fault, but I want to see what he can do in big game situations.
Trades....
Im all for trading that number two and Santana or Doughty for gaither….but we need to hold on to Carlos. We forget how far and few between decent cornerbacks are and Carlos is a really decent corner…he had a bad yr last yr but damn…everybody in our secondary underachieved last yr….everyone. To go into next season with Deangelo and an unproven Barnes is a pretty poor formula for success……
I just have a problem with his hands.
I saw so many points lip right through his digits last year that it bothered me. I think the DC needs to line him up in the WR drills and just throw at him all day. THEN, I’d love for him to be here.
Butterfingers...
U know there is a reason why the guy is a corner instead of a wideout…..but i have a strong suspicion that there are plenty of other corners in the leaugue that r droppin shit like he is too but we just dont know about it cus we dont follow them….
It's definately the toughest position to play, arguably.
And you’re gonna get burnt from time to time. I think Greg Blache’s soft defense and lining his CB’s up 7-8 yards off the ball was a problem too. But if he’s gonna talk about being THAT good, he needs to back it up. Being tendered for a 1st rounder when you were drafted in the first round is not an insult. And if he was serious about not wanting to be here, he wouldn’t be crying foul when it happened. But our team was in DESPERATE need of TO’s last year, and he was in position, which proves that he’s a good CB, but he just couldn’t catch the swine. And what REALLY made him look bad, was when Horton was catching everything he got a chance to during his rookie season.
Defensive backs tackling game.
The NFL has some bad tackling defensive backs. Rogers does better than many. The teams do not practice tackling a lot due to such practices resulting in injuries.
by Jefferson1935 on Mar 14, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
agreed- you need three solid CB these days … and a free safety!
by les boulez bomber on Mar 16, 2010 7:10 AM EDT up reply actions
His hands are certainly an issue
He doesn’t help us with turnovers, but he definitly helps us with his coverage
Right. And Jim Haslett is a TO preaching DC.
My opinion, Rogers needs to stop complaining and prove that he can catch. He would have been Pro Bowl bound if half of those slips would have been catches.
Cooley.....
I still dont understand why were not trying to trade Cooley for a number two. Theres no purpose in having him and Fred on the roster…Davis proved himself to be a serious playmaker and we need as many draft picks as possible……Or maybe Cooley isnt viewed as being worth a number two in teams eyes…idk…..just my thoughts…
It would hurt to see Cooley go
but if it was to happen, and a second came our way, I could live with it. I just imagine the match-up problems both he and Davis would cause being on the field together.
Matchups...
Yeah they would certainly cause sum helluva matchup problems but really….how many teams in nfl history have employed a two tight end set where both tight ends were viable pass catching threats??…it hasnt happened and the odds of the Redskins being the first team to employ it are far and few between….It would just end up being a waste of one their talents in the end……
What about moving Cooley back to H-Back or Slot?
Sure, Shanahan runs a lot of single back sets, so it’s probably unlikey. But I can see Cooley in the slot running drag routes. I don’t know….I tend to agree with you that Cooley’s the odd man out and the best trade bait that we have. We can also play the “just coming off of injury” game with him, and see if he’s willing to move around in the offense.
As a "baller" and not a TE,
I would rather come off the line, unpressed anyway. I would love to be in the slot and have plenty of room to rome free off the line.
We could have Cooley be the regular TE and utilize Davis as a replacement or complement in the red zone
I can see Cooley getting 60 balls and 3 TD’s and Sleepy 35 but with 6 TD’s.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 14, 2010 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Just the simple fact that it hasn't been done is a good enough reason to try it.
Obviously something that other teams haven’t seen before will catch them off guard.
Here are the potential guys I believe we could afford to trade
and the maximum pick I believe we could get for them:
JC – 2nd
Cooley – 2nd
Rogers – 2nd
McIntosh – 3rd
Moss – 3rd
Portis – 4th
Carter – 4th
Doughty – 5th
sounds bout right....
But i really dont think we can even get a second for J.C……maybe a third
I would hope we could get a 2nd for JC.
Teams are talking 2nd for Kevin Kolb and he’s barely played a down.
Yep I agree, that looks about right.
I can see several of these guys getting traded before or during the draft.
JC, Carter, McIntosh, and then Rogers.
I think at least 2 of them go.
Cooley and Landry/Horton could also get traded.
I think Portis gets cut before June1.
by johnnydee83 on Mar 13, 2010 10:56 PM EST up reply actions
NO WAY...
Cant see c.p gettin cut….salary is about 7.5 mil and 6.5 is guaranteed…..
But cap-wise.....
it doesn’t matter this year. We can get out of it now instead of next season when there will be a cap hit from it that effects FA and the draft!
Carlos Rogers
I don’t remember the exact words, but Shanahan had some great things to say about Carlos – “enormous respect”, or something like that. I think he’s better than anybody we could get for a comparable price. I’d rather trade Landry. I’d also trade Davis before Cooley because Cooley has better hands – I remember the times Davis tipped the ball for an interception. Fred is really tough though. A trade (a defensive player and a pick?)for a really good LT like Gaither would be great because it would let us use the #4 pick for a QB.
We need Gaither! I use to work for a car audio installation shop near UMD and had many terp basketball and football stars come in for a big systems. I will not mention any other names but Gaither is a real down to earth guy even after he went to the ravens. He is huge and looks real tuff also. He seemed to have a differnt broken finger everytime he came in, with all is fingers taped together. This guy is awsome! But I am not ready to loose Moss, so im sure we could find some other solution for a trade.
I would like to say I am amazed
How many people would trade COOLEY before MOSS. WOW. Cooley, a fast moving, great receiver who is tough to tackle and arguably a top 5 TE, or Moss, who was a great speed receiver in his day, but it’s past his day…Um…wow. Thomas and Kelly don’t need mentors, it is time they step up and play. They are very different from Moss’ style, so they need to play on their own. I’d probably trade Davis before I traded Cooley because Cooley is something special, and Davis, while quick and a great route runner, must have tipped two or three balls that led to interceptions. His hands aren’t sure enough to depend on him at a position that is so key for this team. You guys are out of your minds.
Well.....
For starters Cooley gets us a much higher draft pick than Moss or Davis…..and for as good as Cooley is, he has reached his ceiling. Sleepy has a much greater upside that will never be reached if he has to keep playin second fiddle to Cooley. Dont get me twisted, im a big Cooley fan, i just believe that at this point the best thing for the skins to do is stockpile as many draft picks as possible and Cooley is our most tradeable asset…….
Everyone loves Cooley,
but his value may fill other needs. Davis proved he can play and is as dynamic as Cooley. Plus, Davis is getting paid a nice contract. No chance at trading him. It’s almost like they’re the same people and therefore one is expendable. It’s like having Kobe Bryant and LeBron James on the same team. Not enough balls to go around.
And as far as Moss, if you take him away from our lineup, you’re not looking at much experience there. And I don’t know if you’ve ever heard Malcolm Kelly speak, but it’s obvious he’s still a young guy who’s trying to find himself. So in essence, that just leaves Thomas who, while showing promise last year, is not quite ready to be the #1 guy, in my opinion. So if you asked me, it makes perfect sense to put Cooley, a young star with promise, on the trading block, than an aging and questionably productive Moss whom I doubt you’d get a lot for right now.
Sure
Davis proved he can play and is as dynamic as Cooley
in a limited game span. What he hasn’t proved is that he can be as consistent as Cooley. I seem to remember him dropping a few gimmies at the end of the year that really made me nervous. Don’t get me wrong, I do think he’s gonna be good. But I KNOW Cooley is good. I’m not saying Cooley is “untouchable”, but I think it’s crazy to trade him for a draft pick. You already know what you have in Cooley – a Pro Bowler who is top 5 at his position. Are you really gonna give that up for an unknown commodity? That’d be nuts.
Moss, on the other hand, I would trade in a heartbeat for the right deal. He’s a speed receiver, with hamstring issues, who’s reached 30. His shelf life is VERY limited. Frankly, I think a 3rd rounder for Moss would be stretching it. Maybe New England would give us one. Again, I am a big fan of Moss. But we are rebuilding, so dumping a 30 year old receiver with MAYBE 2 years of productivity left in him would be an easy decision.
Agreed
Don’t get me wrong, Davis looked good during his limited time out there, but to me the only thing he has proved is the fact that he has something to prove. He caused about 3 or 4 interceptions from what I remember. I’d rather see him outplay Cooley for a full year then talk about trading Cooley instead of seeing Davis perform well for about half a year.
I wouldn't trade Cooley for anything less than a top-40 pick.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 15, 2010 8:39 AM EDT up reply actions
I am all for Gaither
Giving up a 2nd rounder for a top player at a position of need is ab absolutely great idea. Problem is, Baltimore needs CB help before they need safety help. Unless the skins are willing to deal Rodgers, I don’t see us getting the deal done without adding another draft pick. If possible, next years 4th would be alright (at least I’d be okay with it) if they’d take that deal.
If we got Gaither, we’d be able to use our 1st rounder on a defensive playmaker like McCoy or Berry. Berry would probably be better, since he can cause havoc anywhere on the field and get us some much needed turnovers.
by Nobetterthenbob on Mar 14, 2010 4:51 PM EDT reply actions
Why defense?
I would have no problem with them getting Gaither and still drafting a linemen. We need more than one guy on the line.
The talent on the top
Is very, very good and we do have holes left on the defensive side. We will have already addressed out biggest concern at LT, out next big concern I believe is the deep play on defense, which is why I was thinking Berry. Others like McCoy or Suh, whoever drops and that would be fine too, but just because we have problems on the Oline doesn’t mean we can ignore the problems we have on defense.
by Nobetterthenbob on Mar 15, 2010 1:37 AM EDT up reply actions
UGH
why does everyone think safety is such a big concern? I realize that Landry is an awful FS, but he isn’t going anywhere. In fact, you heard it here first that he will be starting on Day 1. Next we have 2 starting caliber strong safeties. Could we USE an upgrade? Sure. But there are PLENTY of other areas of NEED. Here they are, probably in this order:
1st) O-line - HUGE need. ’Nuff said.
2nd) O-line - see above
3rd) O-line - see above above
4th) Runningback - we led the league in 29-31 year old backs last year, and it looks like we’ll do it again this year. And since we’ve actually drafted less runningbacks than O-linemen in the last 10 years (I know, on most other teams that wouldn’t sound so weird) this is a good time to start.
5th) Linebacker - we are moving to a defensive scheme that calls for a plethora of backup linebackers, and we don’t even know who our starters are.
*6th) Quarterback – * To many, this position would be up higher (maybe even 1). But even those who don’t think we need a starter, you can’t deny we need competition, even if its at backup.
*7th) Cornerback – * This should probably be higher as well. Obviously a lot depends on the Rogers situation, but we need a nickel back too, and we don’t know if Tryon and/or Barnes are ready for major minutes.
8th) D – tackle - Again, new scheme. Will Kemeeatu be effective when (and if) he returns from injury? Nobody knows for sure.
9th) O-line - see WAY above
10th) Return man - Obviously there may be a guy already on the roster who could handle return duties but, again, we don’t know for sure. (Personally, I’d like to see Tryon given a look there) But with the LONG OVERDUE departure of Randle Fell, we definitely have an empty slot in the depth chart there.
So you see, I’ve listed 10 positions where we either don’t have enough starters, or are occupied by guys on borrowed time. Or, in the case of QB, are still a big unknown. Frankly, I would love to see us deal Landry. But, even if we did, I wouldn’t want to waste another top 10 pick on a defensive back, especially a safety. The odds are just too far against them having that big of an effect on the overall outcome of your season. Better to fortify your positions that spend the most time CLOSER to the ball, then further away from it. With this many needs, drafting a safety this high would be like sending the clerks into battle before the infantrymen. Sure, they all wear the same uniform, but there are some guys you would just assume not see in the fray.
I can maybe agree with a few of those
Oline is a big need I agree, but we have a new system and a few guys returning from injury that can help us. If we get a LT I think the last position on the line we truly need to worry about is a RT. I can see linebacker as well since we have a new system and we still have not fill that need yet. I think McClain would be a good fit and would also be a good replacement for Fletcher when he decides to retire. Also, I wouldn’t mind going with one of the DTs at #4 but they would fit better in the DE position than the NT position and we have quite a few able bodies that can fill that spot.
The others I disagree with. Spiller at #4? I don’t think he’s worth the pick. Shannahan can also turn a 4 rounder into a stud so I’d rather we go that position after our first 2 picks. There is no way we are drafting a return man with the first. I would once again use a late rounder then use a top five pick on a return man. If you think that, you are no better than LJP thinking we should use the 1st round pick to trade for cribbs. The QB? No where close to being as big of a need as FS. If JC failed to score points, the secondary failed to keep points off the board. CB might be a need but it isn’t as great as FS.
Fact is, I’m really scared to put landry back there another year. He got beat deep early, we played him 30 yards off the line of scrimmage, he still got beat deep. We have 2 teams in our division that go long ball in the Cowboys and the Eagles. Right now that’s pretty much all the eagles have. Berry is a defensive player that fills a huge need and is a smart pick against some pass happy teams. If he’s the need ed reed or troy polumalu(?) we better draft him. These players a center pieces of their defense and are crucial parts to the 3-4 defense. Draft berry, trade or bench landry if he doesn’t produce, and move up Horton as a starter.
by Nobetterthenbob on Mar 15, 2010 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Shanny can't make a RB faster
Spiller comes with amazing speed, something that can’t be tought. We saw what Chris Johnson did with that kind of speed. Spiller is similar.
I still don't think he's a good pick for us a #4
Speed is fine and all, but it doesn’t matter how fast a back is when we are getting beat deep on the defensive side. A top five pick should A) be one of the best players overall in the draft and B) Fill a position of dire need. While we don’t have a change of pace back, we have 2 Portis and LJ with the ability to start and Alridge who is probably just as fast as Spiller. I’ll take my chances on a late round RB.
by Nobetterthenbob on Mar 15, 2010 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Your prob right
but it’s fun to think of the possibilities he could bring to our team. Imagine kick returns, screens, 80 yd TD runs, lining him outside as a WR(Clemson did this with him often). Damn, it would open thing up a lot!
We have never had this type of RB. Not saying we need one, but it would be great to have.
If I had the money, I would love to have an Audi A8, but I can certainly get by with an accord. Just imagine how much fun the Audi would be. Also imagine the girls you could pick up(ie Jerseys you could sell) with the A8 vs the accord : – )
It's funny you say that
My dad just bought an A4, while I’m stuck with my 2001 accord
by Nobetterthenbob on Mar 15, 2010 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you misinterpreted my meaning
I wasn’t talking about the first rounder. I was talking about overall need. People keep saying that safety is a need. Last I checked, we have 4 guys who have started, are all young and, at least at some point, have showed promise. Like I said, I am in complete agreement on Landry. But I highly doubt the coaching staff is. That’s the problem with high first rounders – they are given a lot more rope to hang themselves than other guys.
Regarding the first pick, I have said many times that I would like to see us trade back for more picks. Aside from that, I’d prefer Suh or Okung. I have no interest in Spiller at #4, or even spending a #1 on a RB period. And, while I don’t advocate taking a QB, I would still take one over Berry. If I’m to read you right, your argument
If JC failed to score points, the secondary failed to keep points off the board.
infers that a safety would have as much impact on the game as a quarterback. I hope that is not your meaning, because it’s ludicrous. Maybe you mean the secondary as a whole, which is still off because a bad secondary can still be hidden by a dominant defensive line. Even so, I would still contend that corner is a more pressing need than safety. And your other statement that
If he’s the next ed reed or troy polamalu we better draft him.
is kind of goofy as well. How do you KNOW he’s the next one of those guys? I remember Landry was gonna be the next Steve Atwater. Lavar the next Lawrence Taylor. I can go all day with this. The point is, since we don’t know, I can’t see spending yet another high first rounder on a defensive back. We’ve gotten burned 2 out of the 3 times we’ve done it this decade. And, as for Reed and Polamalu? They were taken 24th and 16th, respectively. And the best safety last year, Darren Sharper, was taken #60 overall.
Oh, and one more thing – PLEASE don’t ever compare me to LJP. If you do that again, I will find where you live, $hit on your porch, and find 2 of the biggest, ugliest, nastiest snakehead fish, put one in your toilet, and one dead under the passenger seat of your car.
geeze CJ
I’ll give you the number to my dealer so you can chill a bit. lol
SpottieOttieDopaliscious
I'm fine
I just don’t want people thinking LJP and I are from the same planet. Next thing you know, the guys in the white coats will be showing up at my door trying to fasten my arms behind my back and put ME in a room with padded, JC17 poster-covered walls.
I hear ya
First off, I wasn’t trying to say that your line of thinking is the same as LJPs, just the thought of using a top 5 pick to draft a punt/kick returner is ludicrous, especially for this team. So sorry on that front.
Now that that’s out of the way, I think there is another miscommunication on my part. My first line of action if we were to trade for Gaither is to trade back, pick up an extra pick, and aim for campbell while using the other pick for a RB or a defensive need. I’d only want us to draft at the #4 spot if we could not get a trade and if that were the case, I’d rather have Berry.
The fact is, this wouldn’t even be a discussion if Taylor didn’t tragically pass away. We’d might even have the best 2 safeties in the league, but the reality is we do have a huge hole at the FS position. Just because we have talent at the SS, it doesn’t mean it will translate over to the FS spot, as proven by Landry. I’m not sure horton or doughty will be able to make the switch either. If we are going to keep Landry, we need him to play SS and closer to the line of scrimmage. He can make plays when the play is in front of him, not running along side of him. Looking back on some of his plays I noticed he does a lot better when he is in limited space. I’d go on but the basic gist is Landry needs to move back to the SS spot to have success.
My comment about the secondary was not about one specific player, but that of the whole secondary. I’ll basically sum up the secondary right here. There is a difference between earning a touchdown and being given a touchdown. We gave up a lot of touchdowns to other teams through the air and ones that came easy. I believe an upgrade at the position is a necessity for us as a team, especially since we have to deal with the eagles and the cowboys 4 times a year. Rodgers and Hall have the skills to be good CBs in the league and we have depth at SS, so the position we need to upgrade the most is FS, especially when we can draft a player that can have an immediate impact on the overall performance of the secondary.
You are right about judging Berry though. We don’t know if he is the next ed reed or not but he has shown on tape a consistent basis of making plays all over the field and there is a risk when taking any player in the draft whether it be a DB, a QB, a lineman or any positon. A top 5 pick is a spot where we demand results and one of the top 3 defensive talents is more than likely to fall to us. I really wouldn’t mind taking any of those talents whether it be Berry, Suh or McCoy, I just prefer Berry because of what I see in our secondary and because we have players that can fill the role they’d play in the 3-4.
Now have we been burned when drafting DBs in the first round? I think the jury is still out on that one. Rodgers has stone hands but he is a pretty good cover corner and has shown that in the past. Landry has shown that when lined up with an FS that compliments him, he can make plays. His drop in numbers after his rookie season is a huge indication that this is the case.
So to sum my opinion up, lets draft the guy who can be an all-star at a position of need as well as moving our former 1st round pick back to his original position and see what we got. We will have already filled our LT position with a proven player and I’m confident enough that Shannahan will find a great talent deep in the draft to fill some other needs.
by Nobetterthenbob on Mar 15, 2010 10:19 PM EDT up reply actions
your undervaluing our 2nd Rd pick
dont discount the pyschological effect of the new draft schedule, teams will have all night to rejig their draft boards after the First Round, adn them first few 2nd Round picks will have a lot of value, we may even be able to get a 2011 first rounder for Pick 37, and if the team offering it is terrible, i.e Cleveland, Buffalo, Seattle etc, we almost have to take it, then we will be well and truly in the conversation to get Locker next year if Campbell does not progress under Shanahan
Pommylee
Speaking of Cleveland
On 03.05.2010 – The Browns currently own 11 picks in the 2010 NFL Draft, including nine over the first five rounds. CLE round 1.7, round 2.6, round 3.7, 3.28 (From NYJ), round 4.7, round 5.3 (From TB), 5.6, 5.29 (From NYJ), round 6.8, 6.17 (From CAR), round 7.7
Since then the Browns have acquired draft picks in 2010, 2011, and 2012. They traded outside linebacker Kamerion Wimbley to the Raiders for a third round pick this year. Cleveland traded defensive lineman Corey Williams and their 2010 seventh-round draft choice to the Detroit Lions in exchange for a fifth-round pick in the 2010 draft, a selection obtained by Detroit from Denver.
The Skins 37th overall pick, while it would be cool to pickup Gaither at LT, it could be used to pickup multiple picks in rounds 3 and 4 from a team like Cleveland. Later picks would not help the Skins that much. Getting more picks in the first four rounds could help.
by Jefferson1935 on Mar 15, 2010 8:51 AM EDT up reply actions
The same could be said about about the #4 pick.
Without Gaither we would have a gun to our head to take the best LT available. Either one of our top 2 picks can potentially be traded for multiple picks.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 15, 2010 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions
My opinion if we were to sign Gaither
First, we need to SEROIUSLY DECIDE what to do with Campbell. Either committ to him for the future of dump him in a trade. This has got to be priority #1.
If we keep JC………and we can TRADE back in the 1st, I would target Spiller(and cut Portis by June 1st). If we don’t get him, I would target Trent Williams as a RT. If he were gone I would draft Relando McClain or Brandon Graham.
If we keep JC……….and are forced to pick at #4, I would probably draft one of the DT’s if they were avaliable. If they were both gone, I would go Okung, and play him at RT.
If we trade JC……We need to insure we get Bradford. Hopefully the trade for JC will have gotten us a 2nd. I would then draft Ryan Matthews, or Jahvid Best. If both were gone I would go Ducasse to play RT.
Why would we have to seriously decide on JC now?
We can make a much more informed decision after this season. Sure IF we get Gaither, AND someone makes a serious offer for JC, AND Bradford falls to us it makes sense I guess. I support JC I guess but I still wouldn’t give him a contract extension till I saw him this year. Even with Bradford I’d let JC stay unless we got an overwhelming offer or Bradford outplayed him. I’m willing to gamble that we can control his fate through the franchise tag or some other means in the next CBA.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 15, 2010 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Bay, come on
Why do you feel it’s ok to hang the guy in limbo. If the owners agree on a new deal, the cap will most likely come back to keep the playing field level, and JC will become an unrestricted FA. He can sign wherever he wants, and may just do so given the way this organization has treated him. Why is it OK to loose him for nothing? Can’t educated football minds make a decision based on his body of work up to this point? If the Shanny’s feel they can help him improve, that lock him down; period. If not, go look elsewhere. There is enough game tape on him, and I’m sure Shanny has been prepping for this job for a while now. You don’t think he hasn’t been watching JC last year, knowing very well he may be getting this job? I for one an not so naive as some in regards to this QB situation. I believe there is a reason JC hasn’t already gotten the vote of confidence.
I have confidence there will still be a franchise tag or something like it
as the new CBA is unlikely to change in the players favor. I think that “guy in limbo” thing is over rated. This is the NFL guys play without extensions all the time. This tender year has been great for us as we can now tender several guys like Rocky and JC and Carlos, and get one year to see how they fit our systems. If JC want’s to take a contract extension that doesn’t pay him much then fine, if not I’d rather wait a year and let Shanny have some hands on time.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 15, 2010 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Why is it over rated?
You don’t think that has any effect on JC? Most successful NFL QB’s are not in limbo. McNabb, Romo, Eli, Ryan, Rodgers, Farve, Warner(before he retired), Brady, Gerrard, Big Ben, Schaub, Manning, Brees, Palmer, Flacco, Rivers, hell even Sanchez. These guys are all set for their future, maybe with the exception of McNabb with the trade rumors.
well some of those guys prospered after their team showed a lack of faith in them
McNabb has been in limbo for the last couple years as they have refused to extend his contract. Brees struggled from the gate leading the Chargers to take Rivers. After they drafted Rivers, Brees really stepped up his game while looking over his shoulder for 2 years. Eli certainly didn’t have a very comfortable seat before he turned it on his Super Bowl year. KC traded for Cassell and gave him a mega-contract when it didn’t have to. Did that help him last year? Don’t you think KC would rethink how much money they gave him after this year? Most players in the NFL are always “in limbo” to a certain extent. There aren’t too many people that feel they are safe no matter what. I think you are making way too much of this. In fact it might even help JC. He wouldn’t be the first guy to play better or benefit from a “hot seat”. No need to impose an artificial deadline to go all in or fold on him when we don’t have to.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 15, 2010 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Bay,
R U sold on JC, or do you simply consider him to be adaquate?
Or is it that your just dead set against drafting a QB this year?
When have I ever said I was against drafting a QB?
If Bradford gives Shanny a “Coaching Boner” then go for it and keep JC unless we get offered a top 40 pick. Same goes for Clausen, McCoy, or Lefevour(sp?!?) or whoever. I just don’t feel we should throw a QB away until you have a better option. You seem to advocate always going for a QB unless your convinced your current guy is a HOF. Lots of great QB’s have taken some time to develop and have spent alot of time on the hot seat before becoming “untouchable”.
JC is entering a new system and has been so hampered by lack of skill players and O-line we don’t have a great read on him. I’m all for them changing their statements about him but it’s tough to advocate a contract extension as he moves to another system. It would be tough to see any real middle ground for the team and JC. I doubt JC would sign a contract that didn’t pay him well as he assuredly considers himself a quality QB. We obviously have some concerns about him and wouldn’t wanna commit starting QB money to him yet. I doubt there is a dollar figure that would make both parties happy.
As For McNabb he wanted a long extension. He got more guaranteed money but not more years putting him in total limbo. This is after several years of him advocating for an extension and not getting one. The Eagles made it very clear that he is only guaranteed to be on their team this year and even that isn’t much of a guarantee. We did the same to JC.
Look I get it, you totally love Bradford. Thats nice but doesn’t do anything for me. You can’t predict how a QB will make the transistion. What I am dead set are all these artificial reasons you concoct to draft Bradford this year whether it be the “We don’t know when we will be drafting this high again” or the “Well I believe in him but the team doesn’t so we have to draft a new QB and trade the old one”. Just admit you think Bradford will be a stud and want him on the team. It’s a totally valid opinion and no one can take away from that. It just seems your always throwing all this junk out there to throw added weight behind your amateur scouting.
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 15, 2010 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions
So I guess
in your expert opinion, all these so calles conjectures made by me towards Bradford in no way add value or support what I have been saying about him all along. They are just be thrown out there to hypothetically lend more value to my “amateur scouting”. Any person with a stong opinion can back that opinion up with your so called “junk”.
It is only considered junk because you see no value in it, but as i’m sure you are able to see, it does provide value to many on this board who either share the same idea, or to those who are more open to change that your narrow one-track mind will allow.
No one really cares if you agree with anything I say or not. Point is, my opinions are backed up by valid concerns. My guess, based on many of your opinions is that you have probably never seen some of these guys play a snap of college football besided what you see on ESPN or read in the media. I can respect someone’s opinion who does their homework on the situation before responding to, and attempting to tear down someone else’s agruement, but you are the type to just throw shit against the wall and hope to hell it sticks.
How am I not providing homework
I keep on pointing out that not you or anyone can accurately predict how a QB will transistion. I keep on pointing out that only 4 out of the top 15 QB’s in Passer rating last year were top 10 picks. 2 of those weren’t even the first QB taken. It takes 5 minutes on the internet to look through the 1999-2006 draft classes. If you do you’ll notice the top 10 has produced a serviceable QB 8 out of 14 times. Not a great percentage. If you look a little more closely it is even more damming as 5 out of the 8 years the first QB taken was not the best QB from that draft class. The other 3 years are too close to make a clear determination. Again this just goes to show not even the professionals can get it right when it comes to drafting QB’s.
You make some point that all the good QB’s are not in limbo and I point out some of the examples you used were just plain wrong and many of those QB’s have faced times where they were “In limbo.” at some point in their career. It would seem you are the one that just throws stuff out there.
Does this mean Bradford will suck? F no! It just means NFL people and us cannot accurately predict how he will make the transisition. But for you it’s all about Bradford and if someone points out that it’s tough to find any quantifiable proof that Bradford has a better chance to succeed than the next 2 or 3 QB’s taken this year than they are crazy and don’t watch as much football as you. You know what? You could be right, Bradford could be the best QB prospect in years unfortunately that doesn’t translate into success in the NFL when looking over the recent history of drafted QB’s.
You know I find it kinda funny that you would imply that somehow your college football knowledge gives you more insight than some guy that reads ESPN or what professionals write. So your saying you are so much smarter than professional sports writers? That you watching so much college therefore makes you smarter than the people that cover it? It certainly seems thats what your implying.
I got a question what does your homework consist of? It seems like your homework consists of using Youtube highlight clips. That and breathless, mastubatory posts themed around a Hair Band that place you somewhere between Corey Feldman and The Jersey Shore cast in the Unintentional Comedy Scale. Which of those is any different than a typical LJP post?
by BayAreaBullet on Mar 16, 2010 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions
I could tell you what my homework consists of,
But I sure you would simply say I am trying to make myself look important, and wouldn’t believe me anyways, so we’ll just leave it at that. You have your opinion, I have mine.
I don't see your objection between drafting a QB at 1st round pick 4
and a Gaither trade versus your usual proposal of drafting a QB at #4 and some 2nd round LT pick such as Charles Brown. Neither option changes Campbell’s circumstances with the Team except there is less risk with the trade LT than the drafted LT.
That seems to be your mind set.
by Jefferson1935 on Mar 15, 2010 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- From Cam to RGIII, and the weird psychology of draft analysis
- UCLA comes down with a case of Tebowmania
- Ellen tries to get Kate Upton to confirm Mark Sanchez is her boyfriend
- Sore loser Bully Ray spits beer in the face of Brandon Jacobs
- Anthony Shadid followed the Green Bay Packers, with love, from a distance
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
