Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bradford at #1?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bradford at #1?

    simple question

    how does a QB who missed more than half the season with surgery to his throwing shoulder go number one overall?

    over a defensive lineman with reggie white or mean joe greene potential?

    i feel like Im taking crazy pills
    my shoes hurt

    Why Me? The Bob Lamonta Story


  • #2
    simple, qbs are more important


    Saints 2014 draft wish list:
    - No pass rusher till the fourth round (or preferably at all)
    - Corner or Wideout in the first
    - No reaching
    - No Kelvin Benjamin

    Comment


    • #3
      I don't think he will. If a QB goes first it'll be Clausen, not Bradford.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by killxswitch View Post
        I think he will. However if a QB goes first it should be Clausen, not Bradford.
        fixed that for you


        Saints 2014 draft wish list:
        - No pass rusher till the fourth round (or preferably at all)
        - Corner or Wideout in the first
        - No reaching
        - No Kelvin Benjamin

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by wicket View Post
          fixed that for you
          I think he will, however, if a QB goes first it should be Clausen, not Bradford.

          Fixed

          Comment


          • #6
            I think if the Ram's are so badly in need of a QB want to take a QB trade out of the number 1 pick, swap spots with Tampa Bay and pick up some extra draft picks on the way down and then they could still draft get their respected guy,


            Sick Sig by the BONEKRUSHER


            Originally posted by Raheem Morris
            Stats are for losers, so you keep looking at stats and we'll keep looking at wins.

            Comment


            • #7
              bradford at 1 is a reach, period.

              call me a traditionalist but I want my franchise Qbs to have, ya know, played football in the last 6 months... and I want the number of invasive throwing shoulder surgeries to be zero.
              my shoes hurt

              Why Me? The Bob Lamonta Story

              Comment


              • #8
                Yeah it would be very dumb to take him #1 overall, especially when underclassmen like Mallet and Locker are far better than him anyway.

                And in this class of QB's, a lot of players could surprise people, I could see players like Zac Robinson, Tony Pike, Levi Brown, Dan LeFevour or Sean Canfield being better than Bradford in the end potentially. Will it happen to them all, of course not but I would not be surprised if one of those players turns out to be pretty solid as a quarterback.

                But yes, with all the other talent in the draft, I would not waste it on a Bradford, at least not that high.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bigfreak314 View Post
                  I think if the Ram's are so badly in need of a QB want to take a QB trade out of the number 1 pick, swap spots with Tampa Bay and pick up some extra draft picks on the way down and then they could still draft get their respected guy,
                  Yea, cause that's so easy to do right? Because everyone is dying to move up to #1 and take on that guaranteed money.





                  Originally posted by Scott Wright
                  I guarantee that if someone picks Cam Newton in the Top 5 they will regret it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by bitonti View Post
                    bradford at 1 is a reach, period.

                    call me a traditionalist but I want my franchise Qbs to have, ya know, played football in the last 6 months... and I want the number of invasive throwing shoulder surgeries to be zero.
                    Do you happen to recall his last college season and the early process a year ago which had him and Stafford listed as 1A and 1B? Never before has a quarterback been so disrespected. Bradford may not have the hype machine going for him coming off an injured campaign a year ago, but many forget that in just two years as a starter he threw 86 Td's and only 16 Int's. Please, wrap your head against that.

                    Now wait ten seconds for you programmed excuses to come in....

                    Stats inflated due to a spread offense? Eh, not by much and what kind of spread are they running down at OU... In 2007 (36:8) he threw only 28.4 passes per game, In 2008 (50:8) he threw 34.5 per game. To let you know, there were only 6 NFL teams that didn't throw the ball at least 30 times a game. His YPA was very high (9.77 in 08') and ranks at the top among recent franchise QB prospects. Many say that you could plug anyone in that offense to succeed. Luckily we have a concrete example in fairly talented backup Landry Jones, who was able to manage 26 Td's 14 Int and 8 wins for the Sooners this year in a slightly simplified version of what Sam was running and with 39.8 attempts per start, Jones threw the ball more than Bradford ever did, but lacked Sam's confidence, pocket presence, and well, ability to throw.

                    He can make every throw, he is a winner, looks great from a physical standpoint (6'4 1/4 236), is an athletic guy, and possesses the intangibles & throwing mechanics to be a top prospect. If St. Louis would have taken him 2nd Overall a year ago, why wouldn't they take him 1st this year?

                    Those who are saying it will be Clausen if they take a QB should take a step back and get their heads checked. There's no way you're going to compare the success each had in college, physically it's an easy choice, and Bradford's personality really is the final X-Factor as he seems a bit further along maturity wise. There are a few (myself & TACKLE) who appreciate Bradford here for what he has done on the field and it's amazing how many try to use this shoulder injury to invalidate everything he's done. He's been on a throwing schedule, he's up to 100-120 balls a day and his shoulder should be in good shape for his Pro Day and back back to 100% by the time he has to play full contact.

                    I agree that McCoy and Suh are two better prospects. In the Rams situation I opt for Bradford though, as you just can't compete consistently in this league without a Quarterback and this has been a long time coming. Last year we heard to put off Sanchez and grab Bradford in 2010, so why are some suggesting they wait until 2011 for Locker/Mallett? The Rams would be wise not to act like me with my school work and not put this need off.

                    big props to BoneKrusher for the sig & avatar
                    - For daily NFL draft coverage:
                    www.twitter.com/ryanlownes

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Seņor Pudge is right, Bradford was considered to be the #2 guy right behind Stafford (the difference being arm strength and the system)...

                      It's not entirely unfair to see that Suh and McCoy are probably the two premier talents of the draft, but Bradford is not a random bum. He has credentials and is a fantastic player. If the Rams pick him, it's not a reach, it's valueing the position Bradfrod plays correctly.

                      QB's have a bigger impact than DT's, always have, always will. And just so that it doesn't become a "But QB's are sometimes busts!" there have been plenty of high first round busts at the DT position as well.
                      Last edited by Addict; 03-04-2010, 11:28 AM. Reason: nameeee

                      Sig by Fenikz

                      I remember NFLDC
                      don't tell anyone, but Charlie Casserly is a dope fiend

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I agree that McCoy and Suh are two better prospects. In the Rams situation I opt for Bradford though, as you just can't compete consistently in this league without a Quarterback and this has been a long time coming. Last year we heard to put off Sanchez and grab Bradford in 2010, so why are some suggesting they wait until 2011 for Locker/Mallett? The Rams would be wise not to act like me with my school work and not put this need off.
                        Depends no how much you like Bradford, I have never really liked him as a prospect, thus yeah I would put this need for a QB off till next year. Sanchez was a strong armed, athletic leader. Bradford does not have the throwing arm Sanchez has and is not at the same level as a quarterback. Thus again staying Mallett and Locker are better quarterbacks potentially than Bradford so why just take a quarterback to take a quarterback. Again they could easily take a quarterback in the 2nd round with the likes of Pike or Zac Robinson. Or wait till the third and take some of those other guys. They can get a quarterback later with ease.

                        Suh is almost a lock to being a solid pro player, I cannot say the same thing about Bradford, especially after such an injury.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ThePudge View Post
                          Do you happen to recall his last college season and the early process a year ago which had him and Stafford listed as 1A and 1B? Never before has a quarterback been so disrespected. Bradford may not have the hype machine going for him coming off an injured campaign a year ago, but many forget that in just two years as a starter he threw 86 Td's and only 16 Int's. Please, wrap your head against that.

                          Now wait ten seconds for you programmed excuses to come in....

                          Stats inflated due to a spread offense? Eh, not by much and what kind of spread are they running down at OU... In 2007 (36:8) he threw only 28.4 passes per game, In 2008 (50:8) he threw 34.5 per game. To let you know, there were only 6 NFL teams that didn't throw the ball at least 30 times a game. His YPA was very high (9.77 in 08') and ranks at the top among recent franchise QB prospects. Many say that you could plug anyone in that offense to succeed. Luckily we have a concrete example in fairly talented backup Landry Jones, who was able to manage 26 Td's 14 Int and 8 wins for the Sooners this year in a slightly simplified version of what Sam was running and with 39.8 attempts per start, Jones threw the ball more than Bradford ever did, but lacked Sam's confidence, pocket presence, and well, ability to throw.

                          He can make every throw, he is a winner, looks great from a physical standpoint (6'4 1/4 236), is an athletic guy, and possesses the intangibles & throwing mechanics to be a top prospect. If St. Louis would have taken him 2nd Overall a year ago, why wouldn't they take him 1st this year?

                          Those who are saying it will be Clausen if they take a QB should take a step back and get their heads checked. There's no way you're going to compare the success each had in college, physically it's an easy choice, and Bradford's personality really is the final X-Factor as he seems a bit further along maturity wise. There are a few (myself & TACKLE) who appreciate Bradford here for what he has done on the field and it's amazing how many try to use this shoulder injury to invalidate everything he's done. He's been on a throwing schedule, he's up to 100-120 balls a day and his shoulder should be in good shape for his Pro Day and back back to 100% by the time he has to play full contact.

                          I agree that McCoy and Suh are two better prospects. In the Rams situation I opt for Bradford though, as you just can't compete consistently in this league without a Quarterback and this has been a long time coming. Last year we heard to put off Sanchez and grab Bradford in 2010, so why are some suggesting they wait until 2011 for Locker/Mallett? The Rams would be wise not to act like me with my school work and not put this need off.
                          I agree 100% with everything you said there. I can at least understand the McCoy and Suh love but I still struggle to understand why Clausen is getting any love as the top QB prospect.

                          sig by BoneKrusher

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by LonghornsLegend View Post
                            Yea, cause that's so easy to do right? Because everyone is dying to move up to #1 and take on that guaranteed money.
                            If and only IF Tampa Bay really wants Suh, like every draft expert believes why wouldnt you trade up for a game changer on defense and I might add a defense that last in the league in run defense, (158 yds/game). I know the Glazers are cheap but this aint FA.


                            Sick Sig by the BONEKRUSHER


                            Originally posted by Raheem Morris
                            Stats are for losers, so you keep looking at stats and we'll keep looking at wins.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by LonghornsLegend View Post
                              Yea, cause that's so easy to do right? Because everyone is dying to move up to #1 and take on that guaranteed money.
                              I think we may see the Manning/Rivers type deal happen again this year. The difference in money from 1st to 3rd is not terribly limiting, imo. But I agree that Tampa wouldn't necessarily want to do it when they probably think they could sit back and draft Suh or McCoy.

                              St. Louis drafts Suh. Detriot takes McCoy. Tampa takes Bradford and the trade is on, with Tampa giving up a 3rd (they have two) to land the DT they really want.

                              That is my best guess as to how it goes down.

                              Sig img shamelessly stolen from teh interwebs

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information