If Sam Bradford is there, should we take him?

[JoeKnowsBest]

At first glance I know alot of you would say no. But let's take a deeper look at our situation. Would you rather have a Peyton Manning/Aaron Rogers and be set at the QB postion for the next 20 years, or would you rather have a great LT with a good QB for the next 2-3 years until he either gets hurt or has to retire... and then go back to the same old song and dance of searching for decades for a QB like we did before, with no one for that great LT to block for, just like Chris Samuels had happen?

There is also other options besides the draft to address the offensive line, at least in the short term until we actually get more draft picks. There's Flozell Adams, Shaun Andrews, Levi Jones, Jared Gaither, and many more.

So if I were thinking about long term success for this franchise, and Sam Bradford actually fell to our spot at #4, I would take Sam Bradford if he were there at #4 and sign Adams or trade for Gaither. This would be an idea situation because Sam could sit and learn under McNabb and by the time he's ready to play, we will have our young offensive hogs formed and ready to protect him & dominate defenses.

Of coarse there is also the option of finding another team that would mortgage the farm to trade up to our spot and get him. And with our lack of picks this season, if offered that kind of deal I'd probably do it. At the same time, it would be painful to know that you may be sacrificing your only chance to lock down the most important position (Quarterback) on the football field for the next 20 years. Not for 3 or so years, but for the next 20 years. And again, we would also need a team willing to make that kind of offer, and still have a good enough first round postion that we could still be in a spot to take someone like Trent Wililams or another great offensive tackle, or even consider Jimmy Clausen.

I'd like to consider success for the long term and not continue the same short sighted moves that make our struggle a yearly reduntant thing. And that's what I would do. What would you do if Bradford was still on the board by our pick at #4?

[SnyderMustGo]

Yes.

Not really even a question.

[MrJL]

I would draft him to trade him. With him officially a Redskin after the number 4 pick we'd have more leverage than just waiting the 15 to 20 minutes for someone to give us a call before we had to make the selection.

[RWJ]

If Bradford amazingly drops to #4, Shanny/Allen send the card up immediately. He would be our future QB.:) Super very unlikely to happen though.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Hmm...yes.

Bradford gets to sit for 2 years behind McNabb, under the tutelage of him and the Shanahans? Sounds sweet. Aw yeah. Never having to worry about QB for a decade or two. Awwwwwwwwwwwww yeaaaaaaaaahhhhh. And we know Mike can turn water into wine on the offensive line. Awwwwwwwwwwww yeah.

I'd do it if Okung wasn't on the board, or if we couldn't trade down.

[HailToTheRedskins14]

Absolutely, no question. It would be a great situation. If Clausen was a little better rated, he'd be in the question too, but fortunately for us, he's not (because that would be a tough decision to make). I don't think Bradford is a sure thing, but he's about as close as they come nowadays.

I do disagree that it would lock up our QB position for "the next 20 years". That's a bit premature. It would for sure lock it up for the next 5 years, because McNabb should last around 3 years and Bradford will get 2 years regardless of performance (unless he is horrible, but by then he would have 3 years in the system, probably getting a couple starts here or there due to McNabb's somewhat proneness to get injured). Not to mention he'd be learning from a truly top 10-15 QB in the meantime. It'd be a fantastic situation.

[wvtbred]

It's like deja vu all over again yogi!

[SAli457180]

I think the Skins should take him if he drops to #4, but they could also stockpile picks if they choose to trade down.

[thesubmittedone]

If our coaches and scouts feel he's as sure a bet to be an elite franchise QB for years to come, then yeah, of course! Only time you don't do that is if you've just drafted one of those types recently or got a younger franchise QB on your roster already.

If you're not so sure and you feel there is a significant chance he won't be one of the elites, then no. Just wait until another guy shows you that next draft.

[Combatant]

If Bradford amazingly drops to #4, Shanny/Allen send the card up immediately. He would be our future QB.:) Super very unlikely to happen though.

If they send the card up immediately they'd be idiots. If they're smart they will take it to the very last second and see what offers come their way.

[MrJL]

If Bradford amazingly drops to #4, Shanny/Allen send the card up immediately. He would be our future QB.:) Super very unlikely to happen though.

Not that unlikely. All that has to happen is the Rams draft Suh and the Lions and Bucs hold onto their picks.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

The brass obviously feel he won't be or else we wouldn't now have a new name on the #5 jersey; but if by some miracle he was still on the board at 4, to answer your question .....

HELL YEAH!

Hail.

[J-bomb]

I guess I'm in the minority for NOT taking bradford @ 4. I don't believe the hype I've seen him play and I'm not impressed at all. I'd rather us trade down and get OL,LB help and a QB later on maybe Skelton,Crompton or Kafka to sit and learn from Mcnabb for 2-3 yrs.

[addicted]

No

Not really a question in my opinion. After we got McNabb we did so already knowing we needed Offensive Linemen help. Now we have no second round pick, and still have the same problem. When are some of you going to understand that no matter the QB, whether it's McNabb, Montana, Manning, or anyone else that with no offensive line the QB won't matter they are dead meat?

I am hoping this exact scenario happens so we can trade down easily. The only way I see us being able to trade down for more picks is if some team wants to jump ahead and get Claussen as I don't believe Bradford will be there. If Bradford is there someone will definitely trade up for him.

The Raiders at number 8 need a QB, as does Cleveland who picks at 7, and so does Seattle who picks at 6.

Hopefully one of those teams gives us there 3rd rounder so they can leap frog the Seahawks. We have no need at QB this year, forget about Bradford or McNabb's outta here for sure

[Skelly Skin]

Won't happen. But, yes.

[Ryko]

I think the Skins should take him if he drops to #4, but they could also stockpile picks if they choose to trade down.

I'd go with the stockpile of picks scenario, as we could form a very good OL for the future, and since bradford would be behind mcnabb for atleast 2 years, im sure there will be another qb (maybe mccoy/tebow/lefevour late in this years draft) or one in next years draft or so that could play behind a new OL just as well (ryan mallet?)

but either way, Im going to agree with whatever shannahan does because I think he knows best.

[Ryman of the North]

without even thinking about it. but bradford is no sure thing even if hes the best qb in this draft.

[ADF]

If they took Bradford, then the McNabb deal immediately becomes a waste. McNabb would not sign an extension with Bradford here. They would have to trade McNabb next year.

[jflow78]

I really really want to say no, I'd first see what kind of deal we could get, but even then I'd take him.

The only thing I've been worried about with him (now that the shoulder is good) has been putting him behind a line that's unstable and when he spends two years running around while trying to transition to the NFL and learn an offense, that his confidence and psyche would be broken. If he were able to sit for a couple years behind McNabb, I honestly think he could become one of the top 5 QBs in the league.

That sounds completely ridiculous to me, I'm NOT a Bradford backer, I supported Clausen because I didn't want to trade up for Bradford, but I really think he'd succeed to the extreme in that situation.

[Ryman of the North]

how is mcnabb not signing an extension a bad thing?

[DWinzit]

He won't be there.

If he were there would be undoubtedly be many big trade down scenerio's.

The best trade option would be the best situation for the Redskins. It would need to include a legit LT or a high enough draft pick that will insure the LT the staff is sold on other than Okung would be reachable. It then allow for other roster holes to be filled.

As to the idea of being set for 20 years with Bradford, I remember hearing that when a first year "QB Guru" Redskin coach selected Heath Shuler with the 3rd overall pick in the draft.:(

The Redskins have their first legitimate franchise QB since Joe T. Protect the man!!!!

[JoeKnowsBest]

Added a poll. :)

[jkypoo]

I voted "yes" on the poll, but not necessarily so he can learn under McNabb.
I would hope even if we took him, we would be willing to listen to offers.
And if we can't trade him, then we have a possible franchise QB.
winwin

[gutlead74]

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!

[Burgold]

That's really tough, but probably yes. If for no other reason than to blackmail other teams into giving us the moon for him (or McNabb)

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

Draft to trade.

[KevinthePRF]

Option 3, hit up the Browns for that King's ransom they were considering giving the Rams.

[John Lydon]

I guess I'm in the minority for NOT taking bradford @ 4. I don't believe the hype I've seen him play and I'm not impressed at all.

I'm with you on that. The only way I would be okay with drafting Bradford at all is if he came with a 3 year, money back guarantee that he is the second coming of Peyton Manning.

[Perky72]

Woah, difficult question.


I voted "yes" on the poll, but not necessarily so he can learn under McNabb.
I would hope even if we took him, we would be willing to listen to offers.
And if we can't trade him, then we have a possible franchise QB.
winwin

Yeah, but if he busts and Okung or Williams becomes a franchise LT, it's win/lose. Plus, his salary might not be justifiable with McNabb here.

I'm leaning no because we certainly need a good LT, we don't certainly need a good QB anymore, in the near future/mid-future. I'd rather give McNabb a few years, build the rest of the team, and then develop a young QB.

If I thought higher of Bradford I'd say yes, but he doesn't seem all that sure-fire as a career franchise QB.

[brianm23]

This guy has a higher chance of falling to the #4 spot than Sam Bradford does.

http://www.interklasa.pl/portal/dokumenty/ue005/mik.jpg


Get it through your skulls people. He's not going to be there. End of story.

[anar-k21]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Bradford will be a bust!!! yall probably sick of me saying this but...... he only played 1 year of college! hes a college rookie!!!!!!!!!!!!! much less an NFL QB!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Perky72]

Get it through your skulls people. He's not going to be there. End of story.

Who here has said he will? It's a hypothetical.

[brianm23]

Who here has said he will? It's a hypothetical.

Why talk about something that has absolutely 0% chance of happening?

[HailGreen28]

Only if he's expected to be better than anyone we could get with a middlin' 1st rd pick next year. I'd say yes given how valuable the #4 spot is.

[The Rook]

Why talk about something that has absolutely 0% chance of happening?

Then this isn't a thread for you. Op said "If" - bad post on your part.

I look at this as the same way if Suh falls to 4 - evaluate your standing, but I would pull the trigger for trade value AND be willing to live with either if no trade came.







:helmet:The Rook

[Perky72]

Why talk about something that has absolutely 0% chance of happening?

Because the answers and how people reason them are interesting, and can be insightful.

It has as little chance of happening as trading JC straight-up for Peyton Manning has, but it's been interesting to see how people thought Manning (or Roethlisberger, or Brees, etc) would do on our offense the last few years. And so on with other hypotheticals.

[Rdskns2000]

I would get picks from Cleveland.

[Chicken Fried]

You'd be an idiot not to take him. He'd be more valuable in the long term than any OT we could take.

[Soup]

No, too much money for a guy that will probably sit for 3-4 years on the bench. I'd rather see shanny wait until next year or select a QB in the later rounds like Pike.

[BlackBush]

This guy has a higher chance of falling to the #4 spot than Sam Bradford does.


He's got the size but can he block?

[wvtbred]

Absolutely the best QB prospect this year with a huge upside so it's a no brainer if he falls into your lap.

[Loco Bob]

What is it with this Bradford nonsense? It was a dumb choice before Donovan. I have a flash. Donovan believes he can play for the next ten years. You draft a QB higher than round seven, and you will have a very, very unhappy #5. He will be gone at the end of the season. The team has enough QBs. It has a severe deficiency of quality players at too many other positions to draft another QB, let alone one who will "learn" for a couple of years. He won't "learn" anything because Donovan won't teach him a damn thing. Drafting a Bradford is a vote of no confidence in #5.

[[[ghost]]]

If ShanahAllen felt he was the premiere Franchise QB to come out in years, than hell yes. Absolutely.

Let him learn behind McNabb. Plus it'll give us leverage in contract talks with McNabb since even if he does bolt after one year, than we still have a viable fall back option.

[NewCliche21]

If he falls to us, then sure, take the full 15 (10 this year?) to see what offers you get, and then take him if you don't make out like a bandit. Hell, do that with whoever falls to us.

[JoeKnowsBest]

Why talk about something that has absolutely 0% chance of happening?

That's the exact same thing they said about Orakpo falling to us last year. Anything can happen so it's best to play out all the scenerios and be prepared so you can have a great draft.

Personally I wanted to see where Redskins fans stood on the slim prospects of it happening.

As for McNabb, the thing that I've always taken into account is he's always been a very physical/running style of quarterback, especially in his early years. (Having nightmares of when he single handedly beat us with his feet.) So he's taken alot of hits and gotten more wear and tear than most QBs. He's also not Brett Favre. Favre has never missed a game since he's started in his career. McNabb tends to miss a couple at least every other year. Just something that goes into my thinking. :)


No, too much money for a guy that will probably sit for 3-4 years on the bench. I'd rather see shanny wait until next year or select a QB in the later rounds like Pike.

I really think Tony Pike is a huge sleeper. I think he is going to suprise alot of people. That's another thing to consider. Maybe sitting under McNabb could help help him as well and it would be a better salary to deal with. Hey, that is what the Eagles did with Kolb.

[hitmandm]

We should trade up for him. Its the only way the debacle of a move to get an awlfully overrated McNabb will work out.

[KennyKhaos]

If Bradford is there, our phone will be ringing off the hook. Chances are Detroit and Tampa Bay's phone would've been ringing off the hook before ours. Teams will want to trade up most likely, giving us the opportunity to trade back for more picks. That's the world I wanna live in.

[Skins Fan 2932]

how is mcnabb not signing an extension a bad thing?

:soapbox:Not signing McNabb to an extension after giving up #37 and a 3rd or 4th next year is just stupid!!! Does the Jason Taylor trade with Miami sound familiar? What was that, a 2nd, 4th, and 6th? Renting a player for one year doesn’t help anyone but the team we trade with and maybe the player. You would think that we have learned this already!!!!:beatdeadhorse:

I am a draft an OT player at #4 person. However given your scenario, I would say that if we did draft him I would assume we could get great value for him in a trade down. In the trade down I would then get my OT but the farther back we trade the less likely Okung, Bulaga, or Williams will be there. I would be more tempted to draft Sue if he fell to us than Bradford due to value and trade possibilities. I highly doubt either would get out of the top 10 picks so we wouldn’t have to trade back far. If I got stuck with one of them, I would be much happier with the Sue situation. But that isn’t the topic of this thread.

As far as having Bradford as a backup, I guess that works but again you are not maximizing your roster if you do keep him. I think McNabb will sign a 4 to 5 year extension but if we draft Bradford, who knows how long and for how much given his new competition. Given McNabb’s presence, we would be fools to not sign Bradford to a 6 to 7 year contract. Given the length of the contract, when he was drafted, and the fact that he has to wait for McNabb to get out of the way, Bradford is going to want major money. That gets expensive for the next 3 years at a minimum! On top of that, we would then be torpedoing any trade value that Campbell had. Who is going to give us anything near fair value when Campbell is getting paid 3.1 Million to battle Rex Grossman and Colt Brennan for the 3rd QB spot? Grossman is there to help teach the new offense. Brennan is a Colt McCoy clone that may or may not have a future with the team. We aren’t going to carry 4 Quarterbacks so what is an opposing team to do but wait us out?

Granted we could sign Flozell Adams, Shawn Andrews, Levi Jones or whomever to man the LT spot for this year. I say if the money is right, do it anyway. But if we draft Bradford, we won’t be able to draft another lineman until the 4th round. Guys back there aren’t likely to be starters on the left side but we may be able to get a serviceable RT. We absolutely need a future starting LT by next year so starting now as opposed to hoping for next year is better.

So with all this in mind, I would only draft him if I knew I could get great value in a trade. My belief is that that value would come eventually so I vote yes.

[wvtbred]

While I did say to go get him I am still surprised at the over 75% vote to do just that.

[Buck812]

Yes.. I was completely against this at first but McPOS doesnt deserve to wear a Redskin uniform and and I want hes privilege to do so as short as possible.

[wildbill1952]

I can only ask myself, "What would Vinny do?" And the answer is, "Yes, Vinny would draft Bradford in a New York minute."

Based on that, I would say the smart thing is to do the complete opposite and get anybody but another QB.

[AllAboutTheU]

Bradford will not fall to 4 no matter what. If the Browns trade up, then they will pick him at 1. If the pick is not traded, there's no way the Rams will pick Suh or G. McCoy... they know they need a franchise QB and Bradford is that for them.

[CPORTISFAN999]

i hope we get bradford

[addicted]

how is mcnabb not signing an extension a bad thing?

Serious?

We traded our second rounder this year and 3rd next year for a single year starting QB to our division opponent?

That would be Vinny like stupidity right there :doh:

[Sandman69]

I would trade the pick and get a OT we are dying for and another pick. I don't think he will be that successful, and if we don't stock up on the OL Mcnabb isn't going to last the season and Sam might have to come in too soon.

This year's draft does not have a good QB group we would be better off waiting on that IMO.

[HRNY4ZRNY]

I would draft him to trade him. With him officially a Redskin after the number 4 pick we'd have more leverage than just waiting the 15 to 20 minutes for someone to give us a call before we had to make the selection.

You got it bud.

[JoeKnowsBest]

I am a draft an OT player at #4 person. However given your scenario, I would say that if we did draft him I would assume we could get great value for him in a trade down. In the trade down I would then get my OT but the farther back we trade the less likely Okung, Bulaga, or Williams will be there. I would be more tempted to draft Sue if he fell to us than Bradford due to value and trade possibilities. I highly doubt either would get out of the top 10 picks so we wouldn’t have to trade back far. If I got stuck with one of them, I would be much happier with the Sue situation. But that isn’t the topic of this thread.

As far as having Bradford as a backup, I guess that works but again you are not maximizing your roster if you do keep him. I think McNabb will sign a 4 to 5 year extension but if we draft Bradford, who knows how long and for how much given his new competition. Given McNabb’s presence, we would be fools to not sign Bradford to a 6 to 7 year contract. Given the length of the contract, when he was drafted, and the fact that he has to wait for McNabb to get out of the way, Bradford is going to want major money. That gets expensive for the next 3 years at a minimum! On top of that, we would then be torpedoing any trade value that Campbell had. Who is going to give us anything near fair value when Campbell is getting paid 3.1 Million to battle Rex Grossman and Colt Brennan for the 3rd QB spot? Grossman is there to help teach the new offense. Brennan is a Colt McCoy clone that may or may not have a future with the team. We aren’t going to carry 4 Quarterbacks so what is an opposing team to do but wait us out?

Granted we could sign Flozell Adams, Shawn Andrews, Levi Jones or whomever to man the LT spot for this year. I say if the money is right, do it anyway. But if we draft Bradford, we won’t be able to draft another lineman until the 4th round. Guys back there aren’t likely to be starters on the left side but we may be able to get a serviceable RT. We absolutely need a future starting LT by next year so starting now as opposed to hoping for next year is better.

So with all this in mind, I would only draft him if I knew I could get great value in a trade. My belief is that that value would come eventually so I vote yes.

All great points. That's alot of in depth stuff that people sometimes forget about.

As for Vinny... never mind I just can't defend the guy. :pfft:

[redskindan07]

I second the draft to trade him notion

[JSheets]

i hope we get bradford

If he's still there at 4 we would be foolish not to pick him up. In as much as I like Colt, drafting Bradford gives us plenty of options.

[Perky72]

One thing to keep in mind: as little as two months ago Bradford was falling to us. He hasn't risen in stock due to playing football, he's risen I guess due to shoulder evaluation and workouts, and hype or some other mechanism. But is this enough to make him, instead of a "perhaps Bradford, perhaps Okung" two months ago into a "of course if he's there grab him because he's so much better than Okung"?

What exactly has changed in the evaluations?

[hitmandm]

One thing to keep in mind: as little as two months ago Bradford was falling to us. He hasn't risen in stock due to playing football, he's risen I guess due to shoulder evaluation and workouts, and hype or some other mechanism. But is this enough to make him, instead of a "perhaps Bradford, perhaps Okung" two months ago into a "of course if he's there grab him because he's so much better than Okung"?

What exactly has changed in the evaluations?

The truth is Bradford, if healthy, was never going to fall to us. This is a franchise QB league. The only reason a LT is important is to protect a franchise QB. If you dont have a Franchise QB, just like Chris Samuels, a franchise LT goes to waste.

[wildbill1952]

My first response to this question was facetious, except for the fact that picking another QB after spending the pick on Mcnabb is stupid and surprisingly Vinny-like. But suddenly this question has generated interest for me. Not because it's debatable whether he'll even be there and not because of whether or not he's worth it or not even because of the standard OL vs QB question.

What I find interesting is the number of voices that used to say we need a QB becase of how terrible Campbell was now saying we still need a QB even though we now have Mcnabb. Extremely interesting. It becomes a chicken and egg mystery. Did they want a QB because they hated Campbell or did they hate Campbell because they wanted a QB?

Just curious when the madness will stop, if ever. Albert Einstein said it best. "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing, over and over, yet somehow expecting different results." Expect the same result as last year if the team does not address the OLine.

[wvtbred]

My first response to this question was facetious, except for the fact that picking another QB after spending the pick on Mcnabb is stupid and surprisingly Vinny-like. But suddenly this question has generated interest for me. Not because it's debatable whether he'll even be there and not because of whether or not he's worth it or not even because of the standard OL vs QB question.

What I find interesting is the number of voices that used to say we need a QB becase of how terrible Campbell was now saying we still need a QB even though we now have Mcnabb. Extremely interesting. It becomes a chicken and egg mystery. Did they want a QB because they hated Campbell or did they hate Campbell because they wanted a QB?

Just curious when the madness will stop, if ever. Albert Einstein said it best. "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing, over and over, yet somehow expecting different results." Expect the same result as last year if the team does not address the OLine.

Just because you don't like it and disagree doesn't make it wrong.

:point2sky

[Fred Jones]

Just because you don't like it and disagree doesn't make it wrong.

:point2sky

Your problem is that you think because we have Shanny our Oline will suddenly fix itself.

Because Shanny had good Oline's in Denver he WILL have good lines here. That is not necessarily so, especially if we don't draft any.

In my opinion, if a QB, doesn't matter which one, is there at 4 and that the FO believes will be a franchise QB, I think you grab him for the future.

However, by not picking a franchise LT, don't expect Shanny or McNugget to suddenly fix all Oline problems. All QB's need protection regardless of how good they are. For some reason you don't seem to understand that.

[addicted]

Your problem is that you think because we have Shanny our Oline will suddenly fix itself.

Because Shanny had good Oline's in Denver he WILL have good lines here. That is not necessarily so, especially if we don't draft any.

In my opinion, if a QB, doesn't matter which one, is there at 4 and that the FO believes will be a franchise QB, I think you grab him for the future.

Wait what? I don't connect the dots and get what your saying.

Don't improve the line, our biggest weakness on the team, so that we spent our first two draft picks on a QB this year?

If I had said lets pick a QB with the first two draft picks this year, would you have thought that was or is a good idea?

Because if we take a QB at #4 and don't trade him that's exactly what we just did.

And if that's what we just did then we didn't address the biggest need of the team and sacrificed that for a QB were not going to use for at least one season. If he's used in year two then when were being skipped over the next year in the 3rd round be sure to remind yourself that you wanted us to spend two draft picks for a one year QB because McNabbs gone for sure if were too stupid to protect him let alone want to make him feel unwelcome before he ever takes a snap.

Drafting a QB at #4 is a stupid move to make. We have sn obvious need at LT and like it or not we have to protect whomever is playing QB. This team also can not piss away the good works thats being down in the front office to change the philosophy that we are not suckers to be used and abused like we were in the past. You do not trade 2 draft picks for a one year player to a division opponant. People need to understand how bad that will make us look in the eyes of the league to do that.




All QB's need protection regardless of how good they are.

Perfectly said, and that's why we all have to hope like hell that Bradfords there when we pick so some team jumps up to get him before Seattle can pick him and we can continue a lost act around here, good Offensive Line play. The line as it is will not compete in this league, I am tired of the same issue hitting us year after year after year. We already fixed the QB position, lets go fix the line

[JoeKnowsBest]

Suddenly with this discussion I'm looking back and thinking about the Hogs. The thing is though, many of the hogs were either mid/late round picks or undrafted free agents. But they were all pretty darn good football players, and they played well together. I can only imagine what how many more Superbowls our team would have won if Joe Theisman didn't get hurt and have to retire. We've been searching for a quarterback ever since. Personally, I'd like to solve that for the long term if that opportunity presents itself because it doesn't come around often at all.

And yes, McNabb is a great QB and a great personality to have on the team, but as physical of a running QB as he's always been and the injury problems he's had the last several years, I don't see him lasting too much longer. That's 1 of the reasons why Philly was ready to move on and go with the young guy. They knew it's just a matter of time.

[addicted]

Suddenly with this discussion I'm looking back and thinking about the Hogs. The thing is though, many of the hogs were either mid/late round picks or undrafted free agents.

Both May and Grimm were drafted out of Pittsburgh in the 1st and 3rd round respectively (20th & 69th overall) so its not like we didnt have high drafted players that made up the Hogs. But the truth is that where your drafted or not drafted doesn't mean your going to be a great player in the league. Jacoby wasn't drafted at all.




But they were all pretty darn good football players, and they played well together. I can only imagine what how many more Superbowls our team would have won if Joe Theisman didn't get hurt and have to retire. We've been searching for a quarterback ever since.

This is a matter of you putting the wagon before the horses. Without the Hogs there was no Thiesman winning a Superbowl. The second variation proved that that with superior players and schemes you could win with a QB who never did anything of note before coming to the team. Im not knocking Doug Williams but without that offensive line there is no Timmy Smith and our second championship. Mark Rypien was on fire that year and easily top 5 in the league and we had one of the best teams in history but the offensive line that year gave up very few sacks that year allowing it to happen.




Personally, I'd like to solve that for the long term if that opportunity presents itself because it doesn't come around often at all.

I'm not saying what your saying isnt true or that I disagree but Im not thinking were not in the position we are in now that we are. We've already traded for McNabb. We've already given our opponants 2 draft picks for McNabb. McNabb is on the team, like it or not.

If Shanny Allen thought that Bradford was cant miss then why did we trade for McNabb?

The whole idea about taking Bradford is in left field, it's not going to happen.




And yes, McNabb is a great QB and a great personality to have on the team, but as physical of a running QB as he's always been and the injury problems he's had the last several years, I don't see him lasting too much longer. That's 1 of the reasons why Philly was ready to move on and go with the young guy. They knew it's just a matter of time.

Yup and Green Bay said the same thing about Farve and the next season he threw 6 TD's in a game. And the year after that he went to the Championship game on a team with a great offensive line. And McNabbs demise is overstated. He is the same age as this years better starting QB in the game and his stats last year were right in line with his career bests.

[HogNose]

Yeah, we couldn't pass on Bradford if he dropped to #4, but I think Bradford will end up being a Cleveland Brown.

[MartinC]

Suddenly with this discussion I'm looking back and thinking about the Hogs. The thing is though, many of the hogs were either mid/late round picks or undrafted free agents. But they were all pretty darn good football players, and they played well together. I can only imagine what how many more Superbowls our team would have won if Joe Theisman didn't get hurt and have to retire. We've been searching for a quarterback ever since. Personally, I'd like to solve that for the long term if that opportunity presents itself because it doesn't come around often at all.

Quick history lesson. It was 1985 when Joey T had his career ended and by that year he was very close to the end of his career. He was bad that year and not getting any younger. even if he had not been hurt Gibbs would probably have been looking to replace Joe at the end of that season anyway.

Not that we missed a beat anyway. In '86 we went to NFC Championship game with Schroeder at QB. in '87 we won the Super Bowl behind a combination of Schroeder and Williams. Then by '89 Rypien had taken over and we were in contention just about every year culminating in arguably the best Redskins team of all time in '91 with another Super Bowl.

We won 3 Super Bowls and were contenders for a decade with 3 or 4 QBs and 3 starting running backs (Riggins, Rogers, Byner). The thing that was constant - we had the best O'line in the NFL through the whole period.

If Bradford somehow was there at 4 it would be an interesting decision and we would probably get a trade back offer which would be the smart way to go. Either way we need to get our LT in the 1st round someway or the McNabb trade is a waste.

We can get our QB of the future next year or the year after while we build and devleop the young nucleus around McNabb.

[MustangSteve]

If the kid can be a real franchise QB then yes, if any doubts then O-lineman.

[ChiefPowhatan17]

You have to take him at #4, if he is available. But, he'll be gone.

[wvtbred]

Your problem is that you think because we have Shanny our Oline will suddenly fix itself.

Because Shanny had good Oline's in Denver he WILL have good lines here. That is not necessarily so, especially if we don't draft any.

In my opinion, if a QB, doesn't matter which one, is there at 4 and that the FO believes will be a franchise QB, I think you grab him for the future.

However, by not picking a franchise LT, don't expect Shanny or McNugget to suddenly fix all Oline problems. All QB's need protection regardless of how good they are. For some reason you don't seem to understand that.

I am not expecting it to happen overnight but a couple things have already happened to improve the oline and I TRUST Team Shanny since they are the experts and not us. Many things will happen during and after the draft to improve the whole team. It's a long way to game 1 and a lot will happen before then.

:point2sky

[wvtbred]

We won 3 Super Bowls and were contenders for a decade with 3 or 4 QBs and 3 starting running backs (Riggins, Rogers, Byner). The thing that was constant - we had the best O'line in the NFL through the whole period.



...and how many of the Hogs were first round picks? How many as high as #4?

[MartinC]

...and how many of the Hogs were first round picks? How many as high as #4?

Mark May was a 1st round pick, Jim Lachey was a trade but was a 1st round draft pick before we traded him for Jay Schroeder and couple of draft picks. Russ Grimm was a 3rd round pick, RC Thielmann was another who came via trade but was a 2nd round pick.

Raleigh McKenzie was an 11th round pick in 1985 and Mark Schelreth was a 10th round pick in 1984. Jeff Bostic and of course Joe Jacoby were undrafted but Heyer is more what you get from undrafted tackles than a Joe Jacoby.

Lets also not forget that Chris Samuels was picked 3rd overall in 2000 and has been a fixture at LT for a decade as well.

You dont HAVE to find O'lineman in the 1st round but its not a bad plan for the second most important position on your offensive team (LT).

[wvtbred]

Lets also not forget that Chris Samuels was picked 3rd overall in 2000 and has been a fixture at LT for a decade as well.


So they come from all sources and that's all I am saying and Shanny is not going to start this year without a solid line that fits his scheme. The change to NcNabb will also help the oline more then most on here will admit to but just wait and see.

As for Chris I know ALL about him and it's a shame how many of his career years were wasted.

[shemp nixon]

i am not expecting it to happen overnight but a couple things have already happened to improve the oline and i trust team shanny since they are the experts and not us. Many things will happen during and after the draft to improve the whole team. It's a long way to game 1 and a lot will happen before then.

:point2sky


+1

[terrifNick21]

I can't believe almost 75% of the board agrees on one thing. :laugh:

[Coral]

I voted no, but I do not fully endorse the rest of that answer, "draft the best offensive tackle," instead I believe that we should draft whichever prospect Coach Shanahan and Mr. Allen view as greatest capable of improving our football team. If Eric Berry is available and he is that player, then so be it. The same goes for either of the defensive tackles or CJ Spiller or anyone else I may have missed.

I don't believe I contradicted myself, because if we were to draft Bradford (,Clausen, Tebow, etc.) they would have no impact on our football team this year unless Donovan McNabb were to get significantly injured.

[addicted]

I can't believe almost 75% of the board agrees on one thing. :laugh:

Definitely goes to show the level of understanding of the casual posters on the forum, glad to know that I'm in the minority on this one. None of you want to address any of the things that have been brought up and just want to play fantasy football. The team that went to 4 Superbowls with 3 different QB's, with three different RB's did it on the backs of the Offensive Line but I guess it really comes down to this not being a sexy enough of a position to draft. I see top QB's in the league like Tony Romo and Tom Brady who were picked very late or not at all in the draft and don't see the consensus that we should wait until the 6th or UFA's list comes out to pick a QB, which is a clear double standard on your parts. Offensive Line is much more important then you guys give it credit for, it's time to stop thinking that a journeyman backup like Artus Hicks or a backup like Stephon Heyer are going to be able to do the job here. Stop drinking your hater juice and give McNabb a chance. Put down your wallets and stop wishing for that next sexy Jersey you won't wear. Get a clue and realize any team that is 4-12 and spends its first two draft picks on QB's is not the way to build a team in any year of the NFL. This forum and it's fans are so smarky sometimes it frustrates me. But hey lets go trade 2 draft picks for a proven winning NFL QB and spend another pick on a QB who we don't need and would mean the end of either Jason Campbell, Rex Grossman, and Colt Brenan for sure and once again ignore the line. Yea 75% of you think it's a great idea :puke:

[MrJL]

If they took Bradford, then the McNabb deal immediately becomes a waste. McNabb would not sign an extension with Bradford here. They would have to trade McNabb next year.


you can draft and trade you know.

[MrJL]

Definitely goes to show the level of understanding of the casual posters on the forum, glad to know that I'm in the minority on this one. None of you want to address any of the things that have been brought up and just want to play fantasy football. The team that went to 4 Superbowls with 3 different QB's, with three different RB's did it on the backs of the Offensive Line but I guess it really comes down to this not being a sexy enough of a position to draft. I see top QB's in the league like Tony Romo and Tom Brady who were picked very late or not at all in the draft and don't see the consensus that we should wait until the 6th or UFA's list comes out to pick a QB, which is a clear double standard on your parts. Offensive Line is much more important then you guys give it credit for, it's time to stop thinking that a journeyman backup like Artus Hicks or a backup like Stephon Heyer are going to be able to do the job here. Stop drinking your hater juice and give McNabb a chance. Put down your wallets and stop wishing for that next sexy Jersey you won't wear. Get a clue and realize any team that is 4-12 and spends its first two draft picks on QB's is not the way to build a team in any year of the NFL. This forum and it's fans are so smarky sometimes it frustrates me. But hey lets go trade 2 draft picks for a proven winning NFL QB and spend another pick on a QB who we don't need and would mean the end of either Jason Campbell, Rex Grossman, and Colt Brenan for sure and once again ignore the line. Yea 75% of you think it's a great idea :puke:

Most of the people here think a good QB can strap a team to their back and win the Super Bowl. They don't remember the 80's where Dan Marino and John Elway showed that wasn't true even for great QBs.

I agreed we should draft him, but I don't want him learning under McNabb, because I think a theoretical trade for Bradford would be worth more than a theoretical trade for the fourth pick. People might think we'd be afraid to pick him and get stuck with him and that would take care of that.

[Hitman#21]

Yes, you have to take him.

[Loco Bob]

Yes, you have to take him.

That is exactly what Dan and Vinny would do which is why the team is in the fix it is in.

[Gold21]

Yes you take him, even if it's just to trade him. Thats what I would hope for.

[Gold21]

That is exactly what Dan and Vinny would do which is why the team is in the fix it is in.

And if we passed him and he turned out to be "that" guy. Then not doing it would be something Vinny and Dan would do.

[myzhi]

I don't believe I contradicted myself, because if we were to draft Bradford (,Clausen, Tebow, etc.) they would have no impact on our football team this year unless Donovan McNabb were to get significantly injured.
When can we stop with this logic? That's reason we keep on trading / signing big name players every off season. How's that been working out. NO. What we need is a long term plan. Just because player makes team a little better next year doesn't mean it's the better choice long term. That strategy should only be use if you are a step away from SB.

Mcnabb is a 2-3 year stop gap, and afterward, we'll be back in same position. And, without top 5 pick, we'll be playing the >80% chance that late 1st / 2nd QB would be a bust again. This was our best chance, 50/50, to land a franchise QB, but threw it away doing same thing. New people same ideas.

[JoeKnowsBest]

Mark Schelreth was a 10th round pick in 1984.

Mark Schlereth was drafted in 1989. It's a technicality but he is one of my favorites so I feel he should be given proper respect about his career.



When can we stop with this logic? That's reason we keep on trading / signing big name players every off season. How's that been working out. NO. What we need is a long term plan. Just because player makes team a little better next year doesn't mean it's the better choice long term. That strategy should only be use if you are a step away from SB.

Mcnabb is a 2-3 year stop gap, and afterward, we'll be back in same position. And, without top 5 pick, we'll be playing the >80% chance that late 1st / 2nd QB would be a bust again. This was our best chance, 50/50, to land a franchise QB, but threw it away doing same thing. New people same ideas.

I agree 100% and more. Too many people are thinking just like Vinny did. What's the next great toy we can award a big contract to in order to win a Superbowl over night... news flash: a Superbowl doesn't happen over night. We should be learning from our past mistakes of signing "quick fixes" that don't pan out. I love McNabb and he is a great QB, but in reality you have to consider the fact of the possiblity that he could be another Jason Taylor, Bruce Smith, Deion Sanders, or Jeff George. Not to mention, besides the fact he's been in the same system his entire career (and now isn't), he has recently had a continuing injury problem the past few years. It only takes one time for him to be knocked out for the year and then learn he doesn't have any more left in the tank. And like I mentioned before, Donnovan McNabb isn't Brett Favre. Favre is a freak of nature. Donnovan also gets hit more because of his scrambling style of play. Even if he does manage to stay healthy (which recent history shows is a challenge for him through the whole season), He has 3 more years left in him AT BEST. Then what? What do we do beyond that? You aren't going to find a QB the calibur of Bradford outside of the top 10 (see Jason Campbell), and you aren't going to be in a position to draft a QB of that calibur more than once or twice. If you are, then you're doing it all wrong in the first place. And quite honestly, we have been. Because we keep being short sighted and assuming one player will win us the Superbowl, and then we keep moving on to make more emotional decisions by going for the next available shiney toy on the market. Our problem is we keep buying high and selling low. We've got it all wrong. It's time we help ourselves by drafting our own guys instead of continuing to rely on every one elses throw aways.

There comes a point when we have to change that line of thinking. It's time to start thinking long term and begin to build a franchise and start it right now. Take the Capitals model of how they established their recent success. Looking at a nice new shiney toy, they traded for Jamir Jagr. That turned out to be pyrite and the team wasn't any good. Having learned from that and being taken advantage of by the agent, owner Ted Leonsis decided to think long term and dumped all his aging veterans, built through the draft, wound up getting great picks, landed himself one of the greatest players in hockey in Ovechkin, ocassionaly signed some decent role players, and bingo he's got a perennial Stanley Cup contender every year.

It's time the Redskins do the same. If Bradford were there (and no great trade were available to us either), drafting him would set us up for the long term. Having him get comfortable in the NFL and in the playbook while in the short term McNabb displays how good he is, is the ideal situation. There are some veteran Tackles available to help out Donovan and get us to next years draft where we can still get some great offensive linemen, AND when we have more picks. As the Hogs show, you can find great linemen much easier anywhere in the draft than you can a franchise quarterback. The odds and the statistics show it. The QB well usually dries up after the 2nd quarterback is taken. Some drafts you can get lucky with the 3rd guy on the board, but not that often.

PS: Tom Brad is an anomoly. Drafted as a backup and played as a caretaker who handed the ball off at first, nobody including his coaches knew he would go on to do what he's done. And Drew Brees would've been a 1st round pick had the Texans been in the league at the time. And that's it for the truely great ones playing today that wasn't a first. They don't grow on trees.

All that said I agree with the assessment of how important the Hogs were and offensive line is. But the point with all this is that you can find guys to make up that great unit all over the draft, and definately more likely outside the top 10, than you will ever find a franchise QB. The QB well runs dry after the 2nd one taken.

[MartinC]

Mark Schlereth was drafted in 1989. It's a technicality but he is one of my favorites so I feel he should be given proper respect about his career.

Your right. Slip of the keyboard or mind!

Just saw this report on PFT so take it for what its worth that the Rams are now dropping hints they will not take Bradford and go for Shu instead. I think its far more likely they do take Bradford but there is a possibiloity we will have a decision to make at #4.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/04/20/lions-coaches-hint-suh-will-be-their-pick/

As much as I want a LT if Shanny and Shanny are sold that he is the real deal you can't walk past a potential franchise QB.

[kvarlo12000]

Definitely goes to show the level of understanding of the casual posters on the forum, glad to know that I'm in the minority on this one. None of you want to address any of the things that have been brought up and just want to play fantasy football. The team that went to 4 Superbowls with 3 different QB's, with three different RB's did it on the backs of the Offensive Line but I guess it really comes down to this not being a sexy enough of a position to draft. I see top QB's in the league like Tony Romo and Tom Brady who were picked very late or not at all in the draft and don't see the consensus that we should wait until the 6th or UFA's list comes out to pick a QB, which is a clear double standard on your parts. Offensive Line is much more important then you guys give it credit for, it's time to stop thinking that a journeyman backup like Artus Hicks or a backup like Stephon Heyer are going to be able to do the job here. Stop drinking your hater juice and give McNabb a chance. Put down your wallets and stop wishing for that next sexy Jersey you won't wear. Get a clue and realize any team that is 4-12 and spends its first two draft picks on QB's is not the way to build a team in any year of the NFL. This forum and it's fans are so smarky sometimes it frustrates me. But hey lets go trade 2 draft picks for a proven winning NFL QB and spend another pick on a QB who we don't need and would mean the end of either Jason Campbell, Rex Grossman, and Colt Brenan for sure and once again ignore the line. Yea 75% of you think it's a great idea :puke:


No we are looking to win for years to come. This is a QB league more than it ever was. We can get a tackle next year that can step in and play, but it is harder to find QBs so you have to get them when you can not when you want to.

[Iced Coffee]

without a doubt.

[wvtbred]

Getting more likely IMO that the Rams will take SB then offer him up and I think we are in the best position to get him. The Rams have more holes then we do and we can offer multiple players such as Haynesworth, JC, Carter, Rocky, Los etc. Not saying all of them but a combo of a couple. That way they are off the hook financially and fill multiple needs at the same time. We get our future QB and get rid of a couple players we don't need or want anyway.

Win/win!

[brianm23]

Just saw this report on PFT so take it for what its worth that the Rams are now dropping hints they will not take Bradford and go for Shu instead. I think its far more likely they do take Bradford but there is a possibiloity we will have a decision to make at #4.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/04/20/lions-coaches-hint-suh-will-be-their-pick/



The link you posted is about the Lions taking Suh, not about the Rams.

[boomlop30]

I would be elated if Bradford fell to 4. It will give him a good 2 years to learn from McNabb and bulk up his frame and learn how to get tackled. Also, in 2 years, we should have a decent Oline in front of him.

[Jim Bob]

I'd like to vote for option C:

Trade down with a team that is desperate to get Bradford and add picks.

Even IF (and it's a huge, huge, huge if) Bradford gets to 4, I don't believe that the Redskins can afford to spend their 1st and 2nd round picks in this draft on QBs.

Add in that their 3rd and 6th went for DEs and I can't justify spending the 1st on an area that is not an immediate need.

Trading back if Bradford falls to 4 is the only move, IMO.

[Jim Bob]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/danpatrick/blog/107361/index.html?eref=sihp

Suh thinks there is a chance that he could go #1 overall either to the Rams or a team that trades up to #1 to get him.

I soooooooooooo hope that happens.

I want the Redskins to be able to trade back from 4 and that could happen if Suh goes 1, McCoy goes 2 to Detroit, and Tampa Bay takes Okung at 3.

I wonder if the 49ers would give up 13 & 17 for Bradford?

[shakinaiken]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/danpatrick/blog/107361/index.html?eref=sihp

Suh thinks there is a chance that he could go #1 overall either to the Rams or a team that trades up to #1 to get him.

I soooooooooooo hope that happens.

I want the Redskins to be able to trade back from 4 and that could happen if Suh goes 1, McCoy goes 2 to Detroit, and Tampa Bay takes Okung at 3.

I wonder if the 49ers would give up 13 & 17 for Bradford?

umm no, san fran is still leaning on alex smith

[Jim Bob]

umm no, san fran is still leaning on alex smith

Yeah and the Redskins might take a QB in the 1st.......

[brianm23]

Get it through your skulls people. He's not going to be there. End of story.


Why talk about something that has absolutely 0% chance of happening?


I guess I'm going to have retract what I said earlier, and very well could be eating crow after the events today. Seems the Rams are making moves to possibly take Suh after all. WHO"D THUNK IT??

[MartinC]

The link you posted is about the Lions taking Suh, not about the Rams.

Opps. Read then post, read then post!

[Loco Bob]

I will repeat what I said before. If Mike drafts a QB higher than round 7, #5 is gone at the end of the season. Think about it. The Eagles aced Donovan for a young QB. A Bradford is deja vu all over again.

[Loco Bob]

I would be elated if Bradford fell to 4. It will give him a good 2 years to learn from McNabb and bulk up his frame and learn how to get tackled. Also, in 2 years, we should have a decent Oline in front of him.

If Mike uses a #1 and a #2 on QB, do you really think that he is smart enough to realize that he needs an O-line? It will be the same old patch, patch, patch as Denver. This is the same guy who starts with a SB team and turns it into one of the worst teams in the league.

[skinnyfan57]

If Mike uses a #1 and a #2 on QB, do you really think that he is smart enough to realize that he needs an O-line? It will be the same old patch, patch, patch as Denver. This is the same guy who starts with a SB team and turns it into one of the worst teams in the league.

Mike Martz?

[skinnyfan57]

If Mike uses a #1 and a #2 on QB, do you really think that he is smart enough to realize that he needs an O-line? It will be the same old patch, patch, patch as Denver. This is the same guy who starts with a SB team and turns it into one of the worst teams in the league.

But seriously what the hell are you talking about?

[cphil006]

Do we want a guy that may ride the bench for the next 5 years... or take a OL that will be a bookend for 10 years.

[cphil006]

If Mike uses a #1 and a #2 on QB, do you really think that he is smart enough to realize that he needs an O-line? It will be the same old patch, patch, patch as Denver. This is the same guy who starts with a SB team and turns it into one of the worst teams in the league.

#2 as in 2nd rounder (for McNabb) and #1 as in our 1st rounder for another QB?

I think b/c we gave up our 2nd, we should trade down and there's a good chance we could come away with two starting OL...

[bobisimo]

Donovan believes he can play for the next ten years. You draft a QB higher than round seven, and you will have a very, very unhappy #5.

Here's my thinking on this: we know Shanahan loves competition. Why should Donovan be immune to competition just because he's a great player?

I say if we can draft a "QB of the future", we should.

It might be a luxury we can't afford to use our first two picks on QBs, but if we get the picks right we're covered in the near- and long-term. We can spend every draft pick and FA signing for the next dozen years on every position except QB. In fact, I'd love to see us draft two OL per year, every year.

But my question is if Donovan wins two or three Super Bowls and shows no signs of slowing down, do we trade him so we can give the team to the QB of the future, like the Packers did or the Chargers did and so on? Or do we trade the young QB of the future and hope McNabb can keep it going?

I say that's an awesome situation to be in. I'll take the "burden" of Snyder carrying the salary of a Brees and Rivers any day. :D

[JoeKnowsBest]

Good post bobisimo. This has been a GREAT discussion! :D