• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

NFL Fanhouse: Redskins still in play for Bradford

Washington Taylor beat Panthers

Lanky Livingston

Guest

Sam Bradford will be the No. 1 pick in the NFL Draft on Thursday night. The Rams will select the former Oklahoma QB first overall, and the likelihood is that he will wear a Rams uniform in 2010. However, that last part is not 100 percent certain just yet. Sources told FanHouse on Wednesday night that the Washington Redskins are still in discussions with the Rams and trying to make a deal for Bradford, who would then sit for a year in Washington behind Donovan McNabb and develop under new Redskins coach Mike Shanahan.

One of the sources said that Washington was the only team still in the mix to trade for Bradford, who has told the Rams he won't sign a contract until after he is drafted. The Seattle Seahawks and Cleveland Browns -- two teams that had interest in Bradford -- are no longer making the effort to try to trade up and get him. And the gathering strength of Stan Kroenke's Rams ownership bid may alleviate the financial concerns that have threatened the Rams' ability or willingness to sign Bradford, meaning they might just draft him and keep him. But as of Wednesday night, even with McNabb on board, the offensive line a lingering concern and no picks in the second or third rounds, the Redskins were apparently still working on a way to come away with the draft's biggest QB prize.

What the Redskins would have to surrender in such a deal (in addition to their current pick, which is No. 4 overall) is unclear. Washington has some current players it has been trying to trade, such as DT Albert Haynesworth, safety LaRon Landry and deposed starting QB Jason Campbell. The Redskins could conceivably package one or more of those players along with their first-round pick in a deal for Bradford. Such a deal would only seem to make sense for the Rams if they're not sold on Bradford or don't want to give him the contract he's seeking (more than the $41.7 million guaranteed that last year's No. 1 pick, Matthew Stafford, got from the Lions).
http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/04/22/source-redskins-still-in-play-for-bradford/
 

Hog Fever

Vescere bracis meis
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
1,688
Reaction score
77
Points
48
Location
Bryson City, NC


Hmmmm….I’m not sure if I buy this.

For the sake of argument let’s look at why it doesn’t make sense for us. We loose a starting DT, Safety and last years starting QB to gain a guy who is going to have to sit on the bench for the next 3-4 years because we now have McNabb. Meanwhile we pay him 45-47 million guaranteed. That makes no sense to me at all.

I guess you can make the argument that McNabb’s deal hasn’t been extended yet, but renting him for a year would turn the good deal we made to get him in the first place into a disaster. Trade McNabb to the Rams and swap first round picks? No, that doesn’t seem likely either.

After writing these past few sentences I’m going to change my mind to doubting this to just calling BS outright.
 

Boone

The Commissioner
Staff member
BGO Ownership Group
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
43,168
Reaction score
3,280
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

If you think Bradford is a franchise QB, it makes all the sense in the world. If you don't, it doesn't. With Snyder, the money is nearly a non-issue. Trading a guy like Haynesworth a season after acquiring him at huge expense doesn't make sense either, but you have to believe the Redskins have at least considered doing it, given all of the rumors to that effect.

I believe we have had these discussions. But I don't think we have the juice to pull it off. Hell - I'd give them Landry, Haynesworth, Campbell, and I'd throw Portis in as a bonus for a shot at Bradford. That's only because I think he's the real deal though, and having the chance to groom him behind McNabb is a winning proposition in my book. But I don't think the Rams find that kind of deal attractive enough to make it happen.

Gonna be fun to see what happens though :)
 

Sarge

Guest
But then the ever present question, who's our LT if we go that route?
 

Aston Gambino

Guest
St. Louis trying to convince people there's a market for the #1 pick, when in actuality, I seriously doubt there is. My guess is we're trying to go the other way and trade back.

Or ... we're trying to package something up to get the #33 from the Rams, which to me, makes much more sense. It might be one of those things where if say, hypothetically, off the top of my head, Colt McCoy was available with that pick, we give up Fat Albert, Campbell, and Carter, but we're waiting to see how round 1 plays out before we do.

11:10. This is going to be the longest, most unproductive day of work ever lol.

Edit: Oh boy....
 

Jimbo

The Franchise Player
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
4,270
Reaction score
5
Points
68
Location
Columbia, SC


The rumor I heard a little while ago from a friend in St. Louis (his brother-in-law works for the Rams) was Haynesworth, Campbell and the Skins pick at #4 for the #1 pick but Rams want more. OUCH!!! Praying we don't do that.
 

Neophyte

Super Bowl MVP
Staff member
BGO Ownership Group
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
8,697
Reaction score
315
Points
238
Location
Dallas


Words from agents don't impress me. They are interested in one thing . . . making money for their client (and hence, themselves).
 

Aston Gambino

Guest
The rumor I heard a little while ago from a friend in St. Louis (his brother-in-law works for the Rams) was Haynesworth, Campbell and the Skins pick at #4 for the #1 pick but Rams want more. OUCH!!! Praying we don't do that.
I'm hardly an expert is assessing the value of picks, but that sounds like a good deal for us if we're really sold on Bradford.

Here's what's interesting though - St. Louis needs a QB, they've (allegedly) removed themselves from the Big Ben talk, so they must be preparing to use their #33 on a QB, right? If that's the case, they might be secretly coveting their second pick as much (if not more) their 1st, in which case we might be able to slide up there easier than we think. I don't think they want to invest that $50 million or whatever it is to sign him.
 

Aston Gambino

Guest
Humoring the idea this rumor is actually true, would you consider this an act of long-term planning, or an act of short-term indulgence?
 

The Burgundy Ghost

The Starter
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
1,911
Reaction score
2
Points
38
Location
The Shadows of the Unknown

Navy Salisbury

Smokescreens.....I love it.

We're taking Okung, Williams, Bradford, Berry and Clausen.....heh.

Gotta love this new administration, NOBODY has a clue what the Skins will do. At this point we're all just guessing.

This is great. Bring on the draft!!!!!!
 

Terry

The UDFA
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
304
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Hershey, PA


The rumor I heard a little while ago from a friend in St. Louis (his brother-in-law works for the Rams) was Haynesworth, Campbell and the Skins pick at #4 for the #1 pick but Rams want more. OUCH!!! Praying we don't do that.
Bollocks to that.

I'd counter with #4 and Haynesworth for #1 and #33. My fall back would be #4 and Haynesworth for #1 and #65.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
As we enjoy today's conversations, let's remember our dear friend 'Docsandy', Sandy Zier-Teitler, who would dearly love to be here with us today! We love and miss you Sandy ❤
    Top