Drew Brees: Consideration for Sam Bradford?

[Bulldog]

Many mock drafts have the Redskins linked to Bradford at #4. 'Sources' indicate Shanahan favors 'growing his own' rather than trading for a veteran.

Does the emergence of Drew Brees in recent years after being questioned about height, arm strength and accuracy coming out in 2000 make you feel better about the potential development of Sam under a good mentor here?
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Umm, do you mean someone else? Because most pundits agree that Bradford has extremely good accuracy (I even read one scouting report that said he had "Peyton-Manning" like accuracy) and good arm strength. Also, Bradford is 6'3 or 6'4, depending on who you believe, and around 220 pounds.

EDIT: I found the scouting report:

http://walterfootball.com/scoutingreport2010sbradford.php

# Strengths:
# Good size with room to add some bulk
# Peyton Manning-like accuracy
# Outstanding job of anticipating routes
# Solid arm strength
# Capable of making all the throws
# Smooth, consistent spiral
# Textbook footwork and can drop back if asked
# Great decision-maker since freshman year
# Understands timing

It does say he'd have trouble fitting the football into small windows if he doesn't make quick decisions, and that his arm strength is average - however the mental aspect far outweighs this. Just look at noodle-arm Montana.

 

[Elephant]

Many mock drafts have the Redskins linked to Bradford at #4. 'Sources' indicate Shanahan favors 'growing his own' rather than trading for a veteran.

Does the emergence of Drew Brees in recent years after being questioned about height, arm strength and accuracy coming out in 2000 make you feel better about the potential development of Sam under a good mentor here?
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

I have to question his value at #4. Although we are living in the 21st century, the technological advances in the medical field are astounding, and Drew Brees has recovered well from his shoulder concerns, I still question taking the risk on the uncertainty of taking Sam Bradford. I know that there is uncertainty with any draft pick as proven over the years, but with so many needs that have to be addressed, is it wise to take such a risk on a young QB who has serious medical concerns? If we have the benefit of trading down and he falls to us, yes! At #4 in the draft? No!

 

[Skinsfan76]

I wonder why everyone has Bradford to the Skins instead of Clausen?

 

[Bulldog]

Claussen I am more familiar with. He has really gotten beaten up playing behind the ND line as a collegiate and there are questions about his ability to make some of the throws at the next level. Still have to see Claussen throw that 20 yard out with authority.

 

[DieselPwr44]

I'd say alot of this decision will be dependant upon Dr. James Andrews,our team doctor and the guy who operated on Bradford's shoulder.

If he gives the team the green light on Sam, I'd say he'd be the pick at #4.

 

[Om]

The medical issue would only concern me if I thought Shanahan intended to start Bradford as a rookie. I can't imagine that would be his plan though, so I'm comfortable with the Redskins medical assessment team being able to make an informed decision on whether or not they believe the med concerns are long-term or not.

As to the makeup of Bradford himself ... haven't seen him play enough under duress to make any kind of real assessment. From what I have seen, he's damn accurate, makes quick decisions and "looks" like he has it going on upstairs. Problem is, as is true of just about all of us (correct me if I'm wrong), w/o having seen him game in and game out, my impression is heavily based on highlights and a few "marquee" games.

I'm long on record as believing you do whatever it takes to land a true Franchise QB ... and if you think you've found one, you don't hesitate, you pull the trigger. I know it's a big "if"---it always is---but IF Bradford turns out to be That Guy ... it will be obvious early on in flashes. And I'll be at the head of the line doing the Hot Damn We Finally Got Us One Boogie.

As of late January, I'll admit I'm intrigued the by the guy.

 

[Sarge]

As far as QB's go, he sounds like a good one.

Problem is

HE

WILL

DIE

behind our line.

Now if we have some scheme to fix at least part of the line in Free Agency, then maybe I can see us getting him at #4. I'm hoping someone will finally be in the draft room that really knows how to play the game ie trade down and still get him, if that's who they think we need to get.

Otherwise, almost every year there's a college QB that everyone, including the danny, oogles over.

I'd still rather see us fix the line first, especially if we can't do it in FA and have to do it in the draft

 

[Sarge]

Doesn't sound like a good year to go QB fishing

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...01/27/2010-qbs/index.html?xid=cnnbin&hpt=Sbin

 

[redskns21]

I'm torn here, I feel as though you must grab a franchise QB when you're in the spot though I'm not sure about Bradford. If it were say Andrew Luck after a few years under Harbaugh, Matt Barkley after 3 years @ USC or heck even Jake Locker I'd be all for it. As of now, I"m not entirely sure. I just hope we don't reach thinking that we won't have this high of a pick for a while because everything is going to get better.

It should be interesting to see how this all plays out, that's for sure.

 

[Elephant]

How did New Orleans get their franchise QB? How about Green Bay? Seattle(Even though his reign is coming to an end)? Baltimore (if he is indeed one)? Arizona? New England? Carolina? Dallas?

These are teams that have been successful over the last few years (If you consider playoffs or a SB appearance successful). Dare I add the Texans with an outstanding QB in Schaub? The QB's on these teams were either drafted later or were not draft picks at all with 2 coming in the mid to late 1st round .

As far as QB's taken within the first 5 picks, San Diego, Indianapolis, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, maybe the Giants and maybe the Jets have franchise QB's. That is 5 or 6 out of 32 teams taken within the first 5. There is also a long list of QB's within the first 5 picks that have bombed and a couple that are still on the fence.

I am not sure if this shows any correlation between top picks and their success as a franchise QB, but what it suggests to me is that a franchise QB can be had late in the first round, in the second, third, later, not drafted at all or picked up in a trade.

I believe the one thing we can't do is take the chance of wasting a high 1st round pick on a kid that may or may not heal from his injuries when there is so much that needs to be addressed now. Draft a question mark at #4, sit him for a year or two and when he comes in discover he was all hype? Is that worth such a high pick? I guess some believe it is worth the risk. I believe we need to get the most value from the #4 pick. I think trading down will give us the most value.

 

[Hog Fever]

This years playoff QBs and their draft position:

Carson Palmer - 1st round 1st pick
Tom Brady – 6th round 199th pick
Joe Flacco - 1st round 18th pick
Donovan McNabb - 1st round 2nd pick
Philip Rivers - 1st round 4th pick
Aaron Rodgers - 1st round 24th pick
Tony Romo - Undrafted
Drew Brees - 2nd Round 32nd pick
Mark Sanchez - 1st round 5th pick
Brett Favre - 2nd 33rd pick
Kurt Warner - Undrafted
Peyton Manning - 1st round 1st pick

7 out of the 12 teams who made the playoffs this season had QBs drafted in the first round. If you expand the group to the first 2 rounds you get 9 of 12. 4 of 12 (that's 25% for you Cowboy fans who might be reading) were drafted top 5 overall.

The other three are anomalies IMO.

 

[mugsy27]

4 of 12 (that's 25% for you Cowboy fans who might be reading)

and im not a pokes fan.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

4 of 12 (that's 25% for you Cowboy fans who might be reading) were drafted top 5 overall.

and im not a pokes fan.

LOL - I'm thinking that was a joke? I hope so.

 

[Hog Fever]

Joke folks....just a joke.