PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft If Sam Bradford declares for the draft...


Pestilence
12-19-2008, 10:59 AM
Who do you think the Lions will take?

Stafford or Bradford?

cdcox
12-19-2008, 11:02 AM
Stafford.

DaKCMan AP
12-19-2008, 11:05 AM
Michael Crabtree

talastan
12-19-2008, 11:08 AM
Michael Crabtree

ROFL ROFL Gotta keep getting those first round WRs.

talastan
12-19-2008, 11:08 AM
I believe they'll pick up Stafford IMO

DaWolf
12-19-2008, 11:11 AM
If the Lions get a competent GM, he may try to trade down and see if he can fill the many, many, many holes the Lions have...

Mi_chief_fan
12-19-2008, 11:12 AM
Bradford. Just a hunch.

the Talking Can
12-19-2008, 11:12 AM
i think Bradford will be the sexier pick, especially if they beat Florida for a "title"

cdcox
12-19-2008, 11:13 AM
Oh, I missed the part about the Lions.

I guess they would bargain the two against one another and pick the one that would sign for the cheapest. Something stupid like that.

Mr. Laz
12-19-2008, 11:19 AM
they would pick Ryan Leaf of course


duh .....

smittysbar
12-19-2008, 11:27 AM
I don't think he will come out

CoMoChief
12-19-2008, 11:31 AM
depends if he wins the NC which I think they will. Florida is loaded with HUGE pussies on that team.

OU Win's - Bradford is gone as he will declare IMO
OU Loses - Bradford stays.

BigChiefFan
12-19-2008, 11:34 AM
Depends on who they get as their head coach and what type of offense they want to run.

royr17
12-19-2008, 11:38 AM
If they are smart then they take Bradford over Stafford. Bradford I just feel would be a better pro QB than Stafford.

eazyb81
12-19-2008, 11:40 AM
If they are smart then they take Bradford over Stafford. Bradford I just feel would be a better pro QB than Stafford.

What makes you say that? I think most people feel Stafford is the better bet to be a great pro QB due to the scheme he plays in at UGA, his tools, and his experience.

Demonpenz
12-19-2008, 11:44 AM
:clap:

royr17
12-19-2008, 11:45 AM
What makes you say that? I think most people feel Stafford is the better bet to be a great pro QB due to the scheme he plays in at UGA, his tools, and his experience.

Basically on the reports that he does make bad decisions at times and that he is inaccurate.

jAZ
12-19-2008, 12:46 PM
Stafford.

Because it's the Lions.

I would want Bradford.

RustShack
12-19-2008, 12:48 PM
Bradford probably doesn't want to go to the Lions. He will go back for another year to lower his stock so a good team can draft him.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-19-2008, 12:59 PM
depends if he wins the NC which I think they will. Florida is loaded with HUGE pussies on that team.

OU Win's - Bradford is gone as he will declare IMO
OU Loses - Bradford stays.

Huge pussies?

Good god, you're a fucking mongoloid.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-19-2008, 01:00 PM
What makes you say that? I think most people feel Stafford is the better bet to be a great pro QB due to the scheme he plays in at UGA, his tools, and his experience.

It's Roy III. That's what makes him say that.

kstater
12-19-2008, 01:16 PM
Basically on the reports that he does make bad decisions at times and that he is inaccurate.

Since when is 61% inaccurate? I guess since he doesn't have recievers wide open by 10 yards to play pitch and catch with, 61% is comparatively low.

DaWolf
12-19-2008, 01:16 PM
Basically on the reports that he does make bad decisions at times and that he is inaccurate.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but that's pretty much what I heard the complaints were about Matt Ryan...

Frazod
12-19-2008, 01:17 PM
Bradford needs to go to a team that I hate, so I can continue hating him. :mad:

Brock
12-19-2008, 01:18 PM
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but that's pretty much what I heard the complaints were about Matt Ryan...

To a "T".

lazepoo
12-19-2008, 03:36 PM
If Bradford comes out, do you think Stafford and Bradford would go 1-2 regardless of the order?

eazyb81
12-19-2008, 03:39 PM
If Bradford comes out, do you think Stafford and Bradford would go 1-2 regardless of the order?

Obviously it depends on the final draft order, as a team such as Oakland certainly won't take a QB in the 1st round. But if the first two teams are ones that need a QB, then I think there's a great chance it happens.

lazepoo
12-19-2008, 03:48 PM
I guess I was assuming it would end up detroit and then us

Zouk
12-19-2008, 03:55 PM
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but that's pretty much what I heard the complaints were about Matt Ryan...

Most of the negatives about Matt Ryan were about arm strength. Pretty much the opposite of Stafford. Someone here said his absolute upside was Matt Hasselbeck.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/matt-ryan?id=310#player-profile-tab-set-1:player-profile-tab-analysis

eazyb81
12-19-2008, 04:01 PM
Most of the negatives about Matt Ryan were about arm strength. Pretty much the opposite of Stafford. Someone here said his absolute upside was Matt Hasselbeck.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/matt-ryan?id=310#player-profile-tab-set-1:player-profile-tab-analysis

Arm strength was a concern, but I'd say poor decision-making was the largest knock on him. He had 19 INT last year, the second most of any QB in college.

Sanka
12-19-2008, 04:04 PM
Bradford needs to go to a team that I hate, so I can continue hating him. :mad:

I'm with him, he looks like a skinny turd. Plus I can't stand Oklahoma

chiefs1111
12-19-2008, 04:04 PM
Who do you think the Lions will take?

Stafford or Bradford?

The Lions are going to shock the world...... when they take a punter with the first overall pick.....

Zouk
12-19-2008, 04:06 PM
Arm strength was a concern, but I'd say poor decision-making was the largest knock on him. He had 19 INT last year, the second most of any QB in college.

That scouting report I attached was pretty standard. His decision making was generally praised highly. The interceptions were seen as being related to playing on an offense that severely lacked receivers. Also unlike Stafford.

Really with Stafford it is all about the arm. With Ryan it was about everything else.

jidar
12-19-2008, 04:18 PM
Neither because they aren't going to reach that much to take one of those guys.

kstater
12-19-2008, 04:19 PM
Neither because they aren't going to reach that much to take one of those guys.

Huh? Who do you think is going #1?

eazyb81
12-19-2008, 04:23 PM
That scouting report I attached was pretty standard. His decision making was generally praised highly. The interceptions were seen as being related to playing on an offense that severely lacked receivers. Also unlike Stafford.

Really with Stafford it is all about the arm. With Ryan it was about everything else.

Huh? His biggest knock was a tendency to force throws, evidenced by his absurdly high INT number. This is a pointless argument, but it's not correct at all to say Ryan's decision-making was "generally praised highly." Most agreed that he did have to force throws because of weak talent around him, but no one cited decision-making as a huge strength of his game.

Anyways, would anyone disagree that both Stafford and Bradford will end up grading out higher than Ryan and Flacco did last year? I think the former two are superior prospects.

Zouk
12-19-2008, 04:43 PM
Huh? His biggest knock was a tendency to force throws, evidenced by his absurdly high INT number. This is a pointless argument, but it's not correct at all to say Ryan's decision-making was "generally praised highly." Most agreed that he did have to force throws because of weak talent around him, but no one cited decision-making as a huge strength of his game.

Anyways, would anyone disagree that both Stafford and Bradford will end up grading out higher than Ryan and Flacco did last year? I think the former two are superior prospects.

I don't know what scouting reports you read. I'm sure there are plenty of Internet stat sheet scouts who saw high INTs and said decision making was questionable. I don't think it was and I cited the best publicly available scouting report from draftscout.com licensed to nfl.com. It read:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/matt-ryan?id=310#player-profile-tab-set-1:player-profile-tab-analysis

Has very good game-management skills, making quick decisions while generally showing proper judgment

I know that the reports I trust showed that Matt Ryan was off the charts in terms of football smarts. I personally like Flacco and Ryan better than Stafford and Bradford and the intangibles are a huge reason why.

Braincase
12-19-2008, 05:02 PM
Detroit? They'll trade the pick to the Raiders for Jamarcus Russell and the rights to Warren Sapp & Howie Long.

eazyb81
12-19-2008, 05:04 PM
I know that the reports I trust showed that Matt Ryan was off the charts in terms of football smarts. I personally like Flacco and Ryan better than Stafford and Bradford and the intangibles are a huge reason why.

What about Ryan and Flacco makes you think they have better intangibles? I can see Ryan, but including Flacco seems odd.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-19-2008, 05:14 PM
What about Ryan and Flacco makes you think they have better intangibles? I can see Ryan, but including Flacco seems odd.

Having a defense that gives up 10 points a game so that you only have to throw for a buck forty every week is a world class intangible...even though it's tangible.

ChiefsCountry
12-19-2008, 05:17 PM
Detroit fans are in up in arms it seems about QB. Look what Walter Football has in the mock:
I've received even more e-mails from Lions fans who told me that they don't want a quarterback. Well, I'm not the GM. Some new guy is, and because there is a new regime in town, I believe a quarterback will chosen first overall.

Reading the Detroit Free Press website it seems the same way. We can only hope.

eazyb81
12-19-2008, 05:19 PM
Detroit fans are in up in arms it seems about QB. Look what Walter Football has in the mock:


Reading the Detroit Free Press website it seems the same way. We can only hope.

Since there are Chiefs fans that still fear drafting a QB in the 1st round because of Todd Blackledge, I can only imagine the irrational fear from Detroit fans of drafting a QB so soon after Joey Harrington.

If I were them, I'd be much more scared of drafting Crabtree #1 overall.

Tribal Warfare
12-19-2008, 05:22 PM
Detroit fans are in up in arms it seems about QB. Look what Walter Football has in the mock:


Reading the Detroit Free Press website it seems the same way. We can only hope.


More and more, I believe Stafford will be available for the Chiefs and they'll select him in a blink of an eye.After the downfall of King Carl the football gods are smiling on us.

Mecca
12-19-2008, 06:07 PM
Sam Bradford is the one with the most to lose from not coming out, all of those players that make him look so good won't be back next year...

Bradford isn't accurate he just gets to throw to wide open guys with no one near him.

BigMeatballDave
12-19-2008, 06:26 PM
I think they're taking Oher.

BigMeatballDave
12-19-2008, 06:27 PM
Bradford I just feel would be a better pro QB than Stafford.Not

Mecca
12-19-2008, 06:28 PM
You really have to take Roy for what he is, he thinks Gunther rules also.

eazyb81
12-19-2008, 06:43 PM
Sam Bradford is the one with the most to lose from not coming out, all of those players that make him look so good won't be back next year...

Bradford isn't accurate he just gets to throw to wide open guys with no one near him.

I get that you like Stafford over Bradford, but that's such an absurd statement it's laughable.

Mecca
12-19-2008, 06:45 PM
I get that you like Stafford over Bradford, but that's such an absurd statement it's laughable.

How often do OU guys have ridiculous separation mixed with Bradford standing back there with no one near him? Hell when guys get close to him he starts fucking up...

I'd have serious serious question about how he'd look under pressure or with guys who didn't get major separation.

eazyb81
12-19-2008, 06:49 PM
How often do OU guys have ridiculous separation mixed with Bradford standing back there with no one near him? Hell when guys get close to him he starts ****ing up...

I'd have serious serious question about how he'd look under pressure or with guys who didn't get major separation.

With "no one near him"? Not very often. OU has great talent, no doubt, but Bradford's accuracy and poise is a huge reason they put up such ridiculous points.

If you want to doubt Bradford because of his system, his incredible O-line protection, or his lack of a bazooka for an arm, I'll listen. But I'm not going to listen to an argument about Bradford's accuracy, because it's elite. He puts balls in perfect spots. And I don't think you'll find many draft experts that disagree with me.

Maybe you mean he wouldn't be as accurate if he didn't have great talent around him?

Mecca
12-19-2008, 06:53 PM
He wouldn't be...I mean really I'd expect most QB's to be able to hit guys who aren't in windows but in living rooms in terms of how open they are.

RippedmyFlesh
12-19-2008, 06:58 PM
I get that you like Stafford over Bradford, but that's such an absurd statement it's laughable.
I can't say who's going to be better but if we pick either of them its not a strech to say they would be the best qb kc ever drafted.This list follows.
2006 3 85 Brodie Croyle
2005 7 229 James Kilian
1997 4 110 Pat Barnes
1995 4 134 Steve Stenstrom
1994 7 199 Steve Matthews
1992 2 40 Matt Blundin
1989 2 32 Mike Elkins
1988 11 282 Danny McManus
1987 7 186 Doug Hudson
1983 1 7 Todd Blackledge
1981 12 319 Bob Gagliano
1979 1 23 Steve Fuller
1978 4 104 Pete Woods
1977 10 261 Mark Vitali
1976 13 361 Joe Bruner
1974 3 66 David Jaynes
1972 7 179 Dean Carlson
1971 13 328 Chuck Hixson
1968 2 48 Mike Livingston
1965 8 61 Danny Thomas
1964 1 2 Pete Beathard
1964 16 122 Roger Staubach HOF
1963 17 136 Billy Moore
1962 3 19 Eddie Wilson
1962 24 187 Pat Trammell
1962 26 203 Walt Rappold
1961 21 166 Dick Thornton
1961 25 198 Ray Ramsey
1961 27 214 Bob Schloredt

ChiefsCountry
12-19-2008, 07:54 PM
You really have to take Roy for what he is, he thinks Gunther rules also.

If Roy is on somebody's bandwagon you should get on the other.

chiefs1okie
12-19-2008, 08:04 PM
With "no one near him"? Not very often. OU has great talent, no doubt, but Bradford's accuracy and poise is a huge reason they put up such ridiculous points.

If you want to doubt Bradford because of his system, his incredible O-line protection, or his lack of a bazooka for an arm, I'll listen. But I'm not going to listen to an argument about Bradford's accuracy, because it's elite. He puts balls in perfect spots. And I don't think you'll find many draft experts that disagree with me.

Maybe you mean he wouldn't be as accurate if he didn't have great talent around him?

You are fighting a losing battle. I have not once, in the 1,273,284 posts he has made about this subject, seen mecca give any credit at all to Bradford for anything. As far as he is concerned OU could have had a 5th grader throwing behind that O-line and still have put up the same or better numbers that Bradford has. There is just something in him that will not admit that Sam Bradford has the tiniest bit of talent. I won't even debate him anymore because his disregard and blindness to the obvious is almost on an assinine level.

kstater
12-19-2008, 08:06 PM
I can't say who's going to be better but if we pick either of them its not a strech to say they would be the best qb kc ever drafted.This list follows.
2006 3 85 Brodie Croyle
2005 7 229 James Kilian
1997 4 110 Pat Barnes
1995 4 134 Steve Stenstrom
1994 7 199 Steve Matthews
1992 2 40 Matt Blundin
1989 2 32 Mike Elkins
1988 11 282 Danny McManus
1987 7 186 Doug Hudson
1983 1 7 Todd Blackledge
1981 12 319 Bob Gagliano
1979 1 23 Steve Fuller
1978 4 104 Pete Woods
1977 10 261 Mark Vitali
1976 13 361 Joe Bruner
1974 3 66 David Jaynes
1972 7 179 Dean Carlson
1971 13 328 Chuck Hixson
1968 2 48 Mike Livingston
1965 8 61 Danny Thomas
1964 1 2 Pete Beathard
1964 16 122 Roger Staubach HOF
1963 17 136 Billy Moore
1962 3 19 Eddie Wilson
1962 24 187 Pat Trammell
1962 26 203 Walt Rappold
1961 21 166 Dick Thornton
1961 25 198 Ray Ramsey
1961 27 214 Bob Schloredt

Not to nitpick or anything, but you're saying both Stafford and Bradford are going to be better than Staubach? You know, the HOF'er.

Geason Noceur
12-19-2008, 08:28 PM
Who do you think the Lions will take?

Stafford or Bradford?

I pray they take Bradford. I don't wish any ill will on the kid, but I just don't want to see Stafford's talent wasted in the pit of despair that's Detroit. If they take him, I hope he does something like Elway or Eli and refuses to play for them, but I doubt it. The guy is just too fricking polite and nice to pull a stunt like that. He needs to use all those connections and do something with them. Get someone to pull a few strings to get traded somewhere else. What's the good of having so many connections if you don't even use them.

ROYC75
12-19-2008, 08:29 PM
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but that's pretty much what I heard the complaints were about Matt Ryan...

You are correct ........ I said then he would be a great # 2 QB or a solid # 1. He has excelled very well so far.

Darth CarlSatan
12-19-2008, 08:50 PM
Michael Crabtree

You watch; I bet he ends up in KC. Not that I want him or anything, it just seems like a "Chiefs kind of move".

If they are smart then they take Bradford over Stafford. Bradford I just feel would be a better pro QB than Stafford.
I feel I should get a free blow job every time I buy a 40 of St. Ides, but I don't see THAT happening either.

Bradford needs to go to a team that I hate, so I can continue hating him. :mad:

Agreed. Let the Llama ride his Heisman fame as far away from KC as possible.

I'm with him, he looks like a skinny turd. Plus I can't stand Oklahoma

Agreed. Oklahoma is a fucking dump whose main exports include annoying evangelists, and chicks who can't fuck.

Not

Agreed. Bradford will make a fine addition to a quality Linebackers sack record.

Now, my turn:

"If Sam Bradford declares for the draft"...


I will:}

!) Wake up

2) Take morning piss

3) Go to work

4) Eat breakfast.

5) Work and listen to sportscast

6) Take lunch

7) Continue working while listening to Petro incrementally obtain his daily douchebaggery.

8) Go home after work and eat dinner.

9) Go online and get nightly fix of Planet Insanity, and

10) Give not two fucks that Sam Bradford has declared for the NFL Draft.

RippedmyFlesh
12-19-2008, 08:55 PM
Not to nitpick or anything, but you're saying both Stafford and Bradford are going to be better than Staubach? You know, the HOF'er.
Staubach is the only one who never wore the red and gold. Only Livingston on this list gives EITHER stafford or bradford even a bit of competition.

RippedmyFlesh
12-19-2008, 08:59 PM
Not to nitpick or anything, but you're saying both Stafford and Bradford are going to be better than Staubach? You know, the HOF'er.
You're not nitpicking i am almost 50 i just want to see 1 good qb drafted in my lifetime.

milkman
12-20-2008, 06:34 AM
Not to nitpick or anything, but you're saying both Stafford and Bradford are going to be better than Staubach? You know, the HOF'er.

He also forgot to include '60, when the Texans drafted Don Meredith.

Ultra Peanut
12-20-2008, 06:51 AM
Michael Crabtreehttp://i43.tinypic.com/ok0bxi.png

poopchutecowboy
12-20-2008, 08:31 AM
If they are smart then they take Bradford over Stafford. Bradford I just feel would be a better pro QB than Stafford.

which makes total sense that they will take stafford

milkman
12-20-2008, 08:41 AM
Basically on the reports that he does make bad decisions at times and that he is inaccurate.

So, essentially, you are making a judgement based on what you've read?

KC Jones
12-20-2008, 08:56 AM
Honestly, I am less than enthused with this years top draft prospects. Can we start the $$$ slotting at last years 10 pick or something?

mylittlepony
12-20-2008, 09:00 AM
I have Stafford ahead. But if Bradford shows great leadership in the BSC championship game and is able to make all the throws at his pro day/combine. I might feel inclined to switch.

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 09:16 AM
Sam Bradford is the one with the most to lose from not coming out, all of those players that make him look so good won't be back next year...

Bradford isn't accurate he just gets to throw to wide open guys with no one near him.Yes, He's a regular 'Ol Elvis Grbac-he throws and catches, too. Jez, Mecca, your takes are usually better than that. Besides Iglesias, who are these stud WRs you are referring to? I'm calling bullshit on the MYTH that Sam Bradford has superior talent surrounding him at the WR position-he DOESN'T. Gresham is a stud TE, but besides those two, he doesn't have much to work with and nobody every calls anyone out over that BS. Stafford gets a free pass and Bradford is treated as if the talent surrounding him will all go to the NFL-nothing could be further from the truth. Enough of the sham.

milkman
12-20-2008, 09:24 AM
Yes, He's a regular 'Ol Elvis Grbac-he throws and catches, too. Jez, Mecca, your takes are usually better than that. Besides Iglesias, who are these stud WRs you are referring to? I'm calling bullshit on the MYTH that Sam Bradford has superior talent surrounding him at the WR position-he DOESN'T. Gresham is a stud TE, but besides those two, he doesn't have much to work with and nobody every calls anyone out over that BS. Stafford gets a free pass and Bradford is treated as if the talent surrounding him will all go to the NFL-nothing could be further from the truth. Enough of the sham.

Bradford has an outstanding O-Line that allows him to just play catch with his receivers.

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 09:27 AM
Bradford has an outstanding O-Line that allows him to just play catch with his receivers.I thought you said Loadholdt sucked?

milkman
12-20-2008, 09:31 AM
I thought you said Loadholdt sucked?

As a potential NFL LT, he does.

But in college, in that system, he's good enough.

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 09:36 AM
As a potential NFL LT, he does.

But in college, in that system, he's good enough.
Good enough or OUTSTANDING like you claimed earlier?:D

Again, I was calling out the WEAPONS that Bradford has, but I'll play along for the sake of the argument. Basically he has TWO great O-lineman and two great receivers that consists of ONE WR and one TE-that's not exactly how it's been spun here and why I felt it necessary to say something.

milkman
12-20-2008, 09:46 AM
Good enough or OUTSTANDING like you claimed earlier?:D

Again, I was calling out the WEAPONS that Bradford has, but I'll play along for the sake of the argument. Basically he has TWO great O-lineman and two great receivers that consists of ONE WR and one TE-that's not exactly how it's been spun here and why I felt it necessary to say something.

I said the line is outstanding.

That doesn't mean that every single player on that line is outstanding.

eazyb81
12-20-2008, 09:51 AM
For me, the problem here is that the Bradford haters don't just discount his play in college because of his talent, but they act like nothing he has accomplished is impressive due to the team he's on, which is BS.

The fact is that we don't know how he'll play in the NFL when he doesn't have that extra second or two to assess the field; he's not guaranteed to be great, but he's certainly not guaranteed to be a bust either. The same questions were asked about Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Matt Leinart, Jason Campbell, etc., due to the respective surrounding talent on their teams. Some guys will still do great, and some won't. But not every college QB with great talent goes on to be a dud in the NFL like some on here seem to imply.

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 09:51 AM
I said the line is outstanding.

That doesn't mean that every single player on that line is outstanding.
And I was talking about the weapons...

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 09:54 AM
For me, the problem here is that the Bradford haters don't just discount his play in college because of his talent, but they act like nothing he has accomplished is impressive due to the team he's on, which is BS.

This.

milkman
12-20-2008, 09:55 AM
For me, the problem here is that the Bradford haters don't just discount his play in college because of his talent, but they act like nothing he has accomplished is impressive due to the team he's on, which is BS.

The fact is that we don't know how he'll play in the NFL when he doesn't have that extra second or two to assess the field; he's not guaranteed to be great, but he's certainly not guaranteed to be a bust either. The same questions were asked about Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Matt Leinart, Jason Campbell, etc., due to the respective surrounding talent on their teams. Some guys will still do great, and some won't. But not every college QB with great talent goes on to be a dud in the NFL like some on here seem to imply.

I'm not certain, and I may be wrong about this, but I don't think that most are simply dismissing Bradford because of the talent around him.

I think most are questioning his value as a potential high first rounder because there are some questions about his ability to make plays if he isn't allowed the kind of time, and he has to make tight throws into small windows, because he hasn't had to do it.

The one time he was faced with pressure, he really didn't fare well.

I think the kid has NFL potential, but I wouldn't risk a top 5 pick on it.

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 09:57 AM
For me, the problem here is that the Bradford haters don't just discount his play in college because of his talent, but they act like nothing he has accomplished is impressive due to the team he's on, which is BS.

The fact is that we don't know how he'll play in the NFL when he doesn't have that extra second or two to assess the field; he's not guaranteed to be great, but he's certainly not guaranteed to be a bust either. The same questions were asked about Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Matt Leinart, Jason Campbell, etc., due to the respective surrounding talent on their teams. Some guys will still do great, and some won't. But not every college QB with great talent goes on to be a dud in the NFL like some on here seem to imply.Thank you. Bradford is talented-I don't know if he will go on to be great, but he sure seems to have the skillset, work ethic, and attitude to make the transition. My beef with the Bradford Haters, is they act as if Stafford is the ONLY QB that can succeed-it's absurd. They also disregard what BRADFORD has done and credit everybody ELSE for that success. Believe me the Sooners have never had a QB of this caliber in the past twenty something years, maybe ever. It's maddening to see Bradford's accomplishments swept under the rug, because somebody PREFERS another player.

the Talking Can
12-20-2008, 09:58 AM
i think i'm one of the few stafford-ites that would take bradford...but i wouldn't expect to play him much for a couple of years...i sure as hell wouldn't want to start him right away...

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 09:58 AM
I'm not certain, and I may be wrong about this, but I don't think that most are simply dismissing Bradford because of the talent around him.

I think most are questioning his value as a potential high first rounder because there are some questions about his ability to make plays if he isn't allowed the kind of time, and he has to make tight throws into small windows, because he hasn't had to do it.

The one time he was faced with pressure, he really didn't fare well.

I think the kid has NFL potential, but I wouldn't risk a top 5 pick on it.


And just what "one time he was faced with pressure" are you referring to?

milkman
12-20-2008, 09:59 AM
And just what "one time he was faced with pressure" are you referring to?

The second half of the Texas game.

eazyb81
12-20-2008, 10:01 AM
I'm not certain, and I may be wrong about this, but I don't think that most are simply dismissing Bradford because of the talent around him.

I think most are questioning his value as a potential high first rounder because there are some questions about his ability to make plays if he isn't allowed the kind of time, and he has to make tight throws into small windows, because he hasn't had to do it.

The one time he was faced with pressure, he really didn't fare well.

I think the kid has NFL potential, but I wouldn't risk a top 5 pick on it.

When was this? The Texas game where he threw for 390 yards?

I also don't agree that he hasn't had to make tight throws. His accuracy is fantastic in my eyes. But again, it certainly is up for debate if he will be able to do that in the NFL when he doesn't have as much time.

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 10:02 AM
i think i'm one of the few stafford-ites that would take bradford...but i wouldn't expect to play him much for a couple of years...i sure as hell wouldn't want to start him right away...and I'm in the same camp with Stafford. I like both players and think both players are legit, I just can't stand seeing bullshit passed off as fact about either player.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 10:02 AM
The second half of the Texas game.
Oh... that game.... the one where the starting middle linebacker (and a damn fine one at that) was lost for the game and the defense struggled while Bradford STILL THREW FOR 5 TD'S. That game?? The one that had Arakpo putting pressure on him all afternoon? That's the one you say he didn't fare too well?

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 10:04 AM
When was this? The Texas game where he threw for 390 yards?

I also don't agree that he hasn't had to make tight throws. His accuracy is fantastic in my eyes. But again, it certainly is up for debate if he will be able to do that in the NFL when he doesn't have as much time.Agreed. Bradford's accuracy is second to none in the collegiate ranks this year-given the competition he's faced. I also believe that is the most important tangiable a QB can have is accuracy, which is why I give the slight edge to Bradford.

eazyb81
12-20-2008, 10:04 AM
and I'm in the same camp with Stafford. I like both players and think both players are legit, I just can't stand seeing bullshit passed off as fact about either player.

Agree, but I've noticed the tendency on this board is to take one position and fight to the death for it, instead of acknowledging that there could be more than one positive choice.

I'd be thrilled with Stafford or Bradford at this point.

milkman
12-20-2008, 10:08 AM
Oh... that game.... the one where the starting middle linebacker (and a damn fine one at that) was lost for the game and the defense struggled while Bradford STILL THREW FOR 5 TD'S. That game?? The one that had Arakpo putting pressure on him all afternoon? That's the one you say he didn't fare too well?

You people get too caught up in stats.

Yes he threw for a lot of yards, and 5 TDs.

But there were situations that he had to make plays to keep the Sooners in that game, and in the face of pressure, he made some bad throws, and bad decisions.

The game isn't all about stats, it's about making plays.

In that game, when faced with pressure, he didn't make plays.

Colt McCoy did.

And I'm not saying he won't be a good NFL QB.
Hell, I think he will, in the right system.
He might even turn out to be a top 5 QB.

But based on what I've seen, I wouldn't risk a top 5 pick on him.

Top 15, probably, but not top 5.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 10:14 AM
It's just funny to me that you take a game to prove your point in which he put up well above average numbers and still say he had a bad performance.

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 10:17 AM
You people get too caught up in stats.

Yes he threw for a lot of yards, and 5 TDs.

But there were situations that he had to make plays to keep the Sooners in that game, and in the face of pressure, he made some bad throws, and bad decisions.

The game isn't all about stats, it's about making plays.

In that game, when faced with pressure, he didn't make plays.

Colt McCoy did.

And I'm not saying he won't be a good NFL QB.
Hell, I think he will, in the right system.
He might even turn out to be a top 5 QB.

But based on what I've seen, I wouldn't risk a top 5 pick on him.

Top 15, probably, but not top 5.How in the Hell is throwing for 5 TDs when faced under pressure all day long, not making plays?

I think your confusing team play for individual play. Bradford did his job. BTW, I didn't realize Tom Brady completed passes while throwing from his back. Your argument is flawed, because you are asking for PERFECTION-it doesn't exist in football-no QB will complete 100% of their passes-none. It looks as those the Bradford haters have set the bar so high for Bradford that no mortal man could actually perform up to their ridiculous expectation.

milkman
12-20-2008, 10:26 AM
How in the Hell is throwing for 5 TDs when faced under pressure all day long, not making plays?

I think your confusing team play for individual play. Bradford did his job. BTW, I didn't realize Tom Brady completed passes while throwing from his back. Your argument is flawed, because you are asking for PERFECTION-it doesn't exist in football-no QB will complete 100% of their passes-none. It looks as those the Bradford haters have set the bar so high for Bradford that no mortal man could actually perform up to their ridiculous expectation.

I'm going to say it again.

You're focussing on numbers.

I'm talking about plays.

There wer 4 or 5 plays in that game that Bradford needed to make a play in the face of pressure.
He didn't.

There were 4 or 5 plays in that game that McCoy had to make plays in the face of pressure.
He did.

Bradford put up big numbers in that game.
Bigger than McCoy.

But McCoy played the better game.

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 10:32 AM
I'm going to say it again.

You're focussing on numbers.

I'm talking about plays.

There wer 4 or 5 plays in that game that Bradford needed to make a play in the face of pressure.
He didn't.

There were 4 or 5 plays in that game that McCoy had to make plays in the face of pressure.
He did.

Bradford put up big numbers in that game.
Bigger than McCoy.

But McCoy played the better game.
So a team should disregard all of his other stellar plays and focus in on 4 or 5 plays to summarize his worth as an NFL prospect-sorry, dude, you're clutching at straws now. Bradford has been lights out this year and 4 or 5 plays doesn't make a season nor should it be the basis of why some don't care for his play. It's an absurd argument.

milkman
12-20-2008, 10:37 AM
So a team should disregard all of his other stellar plays and focus in on 4 or 5 plays to summarize his worth as an NFL prospect-sorry, dude, you're clutching at straws now. Bradford has been lights out this year and 4 or 5 plays doesn't make a season nor should it be the basis of why some don't care for his play. It's an absurd argument.

No.
I'm saying those 4 or 5 plays when he faced pressure the only time that I've ever seen him face pressure didn't give us any insight to how he will respond to that pressure when he has to face it more consistently.

I think the kid is talented, and as someone else alluded to, he has incredible accuracy.

But the one intangible we don't have any clue about is how he will respond to consistent pressure, and that, not accuracy, is the most important intangible for a QB.

It's what separated a Montana from a Moon.

OnTheWarpath58
12-20-2008, 10:39 AM
So a team should disregard all of his other stellar plays and focus in on 4 or 5 plays to summarize his worth as an NFL prospect-sorry, dude, you're clutching at straws now. Bradford has been lights out this year and 4 or 5 plays doesn't make a season nor should it be the basis of why some don't care for his play. It's an absurd argument.

I think you're missing what he's saying.

One of the most sought after traits in a NFL QB is the ability to respond favorably in the face of adversity.

Bradford, through no fault of his own, rarely has face any adversity. Games have been cakewalks.

What Milkman is saying, is that WHEN he DID face adversity, in the Texas game, he didn't respond favorably.

Unfortunately, those handful of plays are about the only opportunity anyone has had to judge his response when things are tough.

He's not saying he's a shitty QB, only that, through no fault of his own, scouts may have a hard time determining if this kid can fight through tough times, because he's never had to.

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 10:42 AM
[QUOTE=milkman;5313180]No.
I'm saying those 4 or 5 plays when he faced pressure the only time that I've ever seen him face pressure didn't give us any insight to how he will respond to that pressure when he has to face it more consistently.

I think the kid is talented, and as someone else alluded to, he has incredible accuracy.

But the one intangible we don't have any clue about is how he will respond to consistent pressure, and that, not accuracy, is the most important intangible for a QB.[/QUOTE


You act as if, the O-line has never given up a sack to anyone besides Texas. You also act as if Texas isn't one of the best programs in the nation, this past season. Bradford has faced plenty of pressure-to suggest otherwise indicates you didn't actually watch the games.

milkman
12-20-2008, 10:42 AM
I think you're missing what he's saying.

One of the most sought after traits in a NFL QB is the ability to respond favorably in the face of adversity.

Bradford, through no fault of his own, rarely has face any adversity. Games have been cakewalks.

What Milkman is saying, is that WHEN he DID face adversity, in the Texas game, he didn't respond favorably.

Unfortunately, those handful of plays are about the only opportunity anyone has had to judge his response when things are tough.

He's not saying he's a shitty QB, only that, through no fault of his own, scouts may have a hard time determining if this kid can fight through tough times, because he's never had to.

Thank you.

And in actuallity, I think the kid might have the mental makeup to fight through adversity.

But, if I were in the position to make that choice, I couldn't justify using a top 5 pick on him based on what little we have to go on.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 10:45 AM
The only throws he made were when no pressure existed? He didn't have to force any throws into tight coverage? Never had to overcome a bad decision or a bad throw and continue to perform? You guys are amazing.

OnTheWarpath58
12-20-2008, 10:45 AM
Thank you.

And in actuallity, I think the kid might have the mental makeup to fight through adversity.

But, if I were in the position to make that choice, I couldn't justify using a top 5 pick on him based on what little we have to go on.

Exactly.

milkman
12-20-2008, 10:45 AM
[QUOTE=milkman;5313180]No.
I'm saying those 4 or 5 plays when he faced pressure the only time that I've ever seen him face pressure didn't give us any insight to how he will respond to that pressure when he has to face it more consistently.

I think the kid is talented, and as someone else alluded to, he has incredible accuracy.

But the one intangible we don't have any clue about is how he will respond to consistent pressure, and that, not accuracy, is the most important intangible for a QB.[/QUOTE


You act as if, the O-line has never given up a sack to anyone besides Texas. You also act as if Texas isn't one of the best programs in the nation, this past season. Bradford has faced plenty of pressure-to suggest otherwise indicates you didn't actually watch the games.

It's possible that I missed games that he did face pressure.
I never claimed to watch every game.

I've seen about half of the Sooners games over the last two years.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 10:52 AM
It is my contention that Bradford is good enough to make his job look a lot easier than it is. I stand on record as saying I don't believe ANY other current college QB would have done better this year in his place. He is a very very good QB and to dismiss him as a fluke because of his O-line or his receivers is nonsense. He still had to make the reads, the adjustments, and the throws.
The kid is a red shirt sophomore. Theoretically he could be at OU for two more seasons.

eazyb81
12-20-2008, 10:52 AM
Thank you.

And in actuallity, I think the kid might have the mental makeup to fight through adversity.

But, if I were in the position to make that choice, I couldn't justify using a top 5 pick on him based on what little we have to go on.

I don't get this.

Is there something specific about Bradford that makes you hesitant about using a top 5 pick on him? Or is it simply the fact that you would be hesitant about drafting ANY QB in the top 5 if they have a great surrounding cast and have not been put on their ass every other play?

Would you have also been hesitant to draft Peyton Manning or Carson Palmer with a top 5 pick?

BigChiefFan
12-20-2008, 10:53 AM
I think you're missing what he's saying.

One of the most sought after traits in a NFL QB is the ability to respond favorably in the face of adversity.

Bradford, through no fault of his own, rarely has face any adversity. Games have been cakewalks.

What Milkman is saying, is that WHEN he DID face adversity, in the Texas game, he didn't respond favorably.

Unfortunately, those handful of plays are about the only opportunity anyone has had to judge his response when things are tough.

He's not saying he's a shitty QB, only that, through no fault of his own, scouts may have a hard time determining if this kid can fight through tough times, because he's never had to.I understand the sentiment, I just disagree with it. I think it's a fair point, but OU has faced pressure from other teams besides Texas. To suggest otherwise reveals someone who hasn't watched all the games and isn't looking at the big picture. I've seen EVERY play the Sooners have run this year and the past three and KNOW that the 4 or 5 plays comment is bogus. I've seen Sam scramble outside of the pocket and make completions. I've seen him thread the needle. I've seen him complete out-routes on a frozen rope-all of the plays that are expected to be made in the NFL-he has done and yet I still see, he has question marks, based on PRESSURE, something that he has NO CONTROL over? Just seems like a jaded argument to me.

OnTheWarpath58
12-20-2008, 10:56 AM
I understand the sentiment, I just disagree with it. I think it's a fair point, but OU has faced pressure from other teams besides Texas. To suggest otherwise reveals someone who hasn't watched all the games and isn't looking at the big picture. I've seen EVERY play the Sooners have run this year and the past three and KNOW that the 4 or 5 plays comment is bogus. I've seen Sam scramble outside of the pocket and make completions. I've seen him thread the needle. I've seen him complete out-routes on a frozen rope-all of the plays that are expected to be made in the NFL-he has done and yet I still see, he has question marks, based on PRESSURE, something that he has NO CONTROL over? Just seems like a jaded argument to me.

I've only seen a handful of OU games this year, which is part of the reason I really have no stance on this one way or the other.

I'm just pointing out that I UNDERSTAND where Milk is coming from.

milkman
12-20-2008, 10:58 AM
I don't get this.

Is there something specific about Bradford that makes you hesitant about using a top 5 pick on him? Or is it simply the fact that you would be hesitant about drafting ANY QB in the top 5 if they have a great surrounding cast and have not been put on their ass every other play?

Would you have also been hesitant to draft Peyton Manning or Carson Palmer with a top 5 pick?

No.

I'm saying based on what I've seen, Bradford hasn't shown to me that he is a top 5 pick.

Now if you tell me he has made plays in the face of pressure, then I can understand your poit of view.

However, I haven't seen him do it.

But, as I said, I haven't seen every game.

I can only reach my own conclusions based on what I've seen.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 11:17 AM
FWIW. one of my brothers is an OU alum, graduated with a law degree from there and is an Asst. District Attorney in the Norman/OKC area. He is a booster and has a lot of close ties to several people "in the know". He has told me several times that it is very doubtful that Bradford declares for the draft. So all this debating over him being taken before someone or after someone else is probably a mute discussion anyway. In my opinion even if he does declare, I personally don't think his talent or accomplishments will be questioned as much as his age and experience. As I stated earlier he is a red shirt sophomore, still elligible for two more years at OU. Which, to me anyway, makes his accomplishments to date even that much more impressive. There is no question he is athletic and smart, those points can be confirmed any number of ways. Does he have the talent to be an elite NFL QB? I personally think he does. And the more I watch him play the more I am convinced of that fact, I hope he stays at least through his junior year as a selfish OU fan.

smittysbar
12-20-2008, 11:19 AM
FWIW. one of my brothers is an OU alum, graduated with a law degree from there and is an Asst. District Attorney in the Norman/OKC area. He is a booster and has a lot of close ties to several people "in the know". He has told me several times that it is very doubtful that Bradford declares for the draft. So all this debating over him being taken before someone or after someone else is probably a mute discussion anyway. In my opinion even if he does declare, I personally don't think his talent or accomplishments will be questioned as much as his age and experience. As I stated earlier he is a red shirt sophomore, still elligible for two more years at OU. Which, to me anyway, makes his accomplishments to date even that much more impressive. There is no question he is athletic and smart, those points can be confirmed any number of ways. Does he have the talent to be an elite NFL QB? I personally think he does. And the more I watch him play the more I am convinced of that fact, I hope he stays at least through his junior year as a selfish OU fan.

I have heard the same.

Mecca
12-20-2008, 11:29 AM
Chiefs1okie is also the guy who said Mark Sanchez is a shitty prospect so take him for what he's worth...Sanchez is much more prepared for the next level than Bradford is.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 11:31 AM
Chiefs1okie is also the guy who said Mark Sanchez is a shitty prospect so take him for what he's worth...Sanchez is much more prepared for the next level than Bradford is.

You have me mistaken for someone else. I never said anything disparaging about anyone. Not my style.

mylittlepony
12-20-2008, 11:32 AM
I think this is a sound reasoning. The cheifs are actually placing the next 3-7 years of this franchise (atleast) on their choice at QB. Whoever is the pick will lead this team for a minimum of 3 years barring injury and if he isnt a complete bust a couple of more years.

Now we have a situation where we're standing infront of two prospects. One is a safe pick, he has experience and all the meassurables the NFL looks for but he has been more of a gamemanager then a QB in his college carrer. He has been through adversity and checked out well. He is a solid prospect with some good upside.

On the other hand you have one of the best statwise QBs in college history. But he hasnt faced that much adversity. He is playing in a different scheme and is playing on a great team. This kid has talent and could be football gold if he can transition well to the next level, but thats anyones guess.

Now do the chiefs gamble their franchise's next 3-7 years on Bradford? From what I've seen so far no. But we still have the BSC title game coming up and the Combine and proday so who knows? If he even bothers to declare.

eazyb81
12-20-2008, 11:33 AM
FWIW. one of my brothers is an OU alum, graduated with a law degree from there and is an Asst. District Attorney in the Norman/OKC area. He is a booster and has a lot of close ties to several people "in the know". He has told me several times that it is very doubtful that Bradford declares for the draft. So all this debating over him being taken before someone or after someone else is probably a mute discussion anyway. In my opinion even if he does declare, I personally don't think his talent or accomplishments will be questioned as much as his age and experience. As I stated earlier he is a red shirt sophomore, still elligible for two more years at OU. Which, to me anyway, makes his accomplishments to date even that much more impressive. There is no question he is athletic and smart, those points can be confirmed any number of ways. Does he have the talent to be an elite NFL QB? I personally think he does. And the more I watch him play the more I am convinced of that fact, I hope he stays at least through his junior year as a selfish OU fan.

I can see the age argument I guess, but I don't see why anyone would question his experience. He will finish this season with 28 college starts, 4 less than Matt Ryan, who was regarded as very experienced, and more than Joe Flacco had in college.

Also, since Bradford is a finance major with a 3.95 GPA, I think he is smart enough to know that the NPV of a six year, $72M contract with $35M guaranteed is larger than a five year, $30M contract with $15M guaranteed, which is what he could get if he waits until next year's draft after they've restructured the rookie contracts.

Mecca
12-20-2008, 11:38 AM
You have me mistaken for someone else. I never said anything disparaging about anyone. Not my style.

I probably shouldn't have put it that way although you did give me a stats line I believe in reference to Bradford or maybe it was one of the other OU fans...

I do however know for a fact that in 1 thread when eazyb was talking about how Sanchez has much better physical tools you told him..."What are the physical tools he is missing? 6'4" 220lbs. strong arm, extremely accurate, mobile, can throw bullets on the run, reads coverages very well, recognizes key matchups very quickly, can throw the touch pass or the dart..... just curious."

Do you honestly believe that because physically Sam Bradford is not on Sanchez level, his arm is average at best.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 11:43 AM
I probably shouldn't have put it that way although you did give me a stats line I believe in reference to Bradford or maybe it was one of the other OU fans...

I do however know for a fact that in 1 thread when eazyb was talking about how Sanchez has much better physical tools you told him..."What are the physical tools he is missing? 6'4" 220lbs. strong arm, extremely accurate, mobile, can throw bullets on the run, reads coverages very well, recognizes key matchups very quickly, can throw the touch pass or the dart..... just curious."

Do you honestly believe that because physically Sam Bradford is not on Sanchez level, his arm is average at best.

Mecca, explain to me how you read that as a knock on Sanchez. I have never, and will never say anything bad about Sanchez because I haven't watched him much at all.

Mecca
12-20-2008, 11:43 AM
Mecca, explain to me how you read that as a knock on Sanchez. I have never, and will never say anything bad about Sanchez because I haven't watched him much at all.

Ok tell me if you still believe that about Bradford....because there is no way in hell that guy weighs 220 either.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 11:52 AM
You and I each have our own opinions on the QB we like. I like Bradford, you like Sanchez. I will never be able to convince you that Bradford has above average talent and you will never be able to convince me that Sanchez is better, which it seems is the direction the conversations you and I have seem to go. As far as Bradford's size, yes I do believe that. I am 6'3" and weigh approx 240-245. When I got the opportunity to meet him and shake his hand, he was at least as tall as I am and I do believe he is easily over 200lbs.

Mecca
12-20-2008, 11:58 AM
I am never going to be in favor of drafting a QB who plays exclusively out of shotgun.

eazyb81
12-20-2008, 12:05 PM
I am never going to be in favor of drafting a QB who plays exclusively out of shotgun.

He plays under center occassionally.

So you would have passed on Big Ben, McNabb, and Flacco?

smittysbar
12-20-2008, 12:13 PM
I am a Stafford guy, but Bradford impresses me also. I wouldn't be disappointed with either being drafted by the Chiefs.

Watching Bradford last year when they went down field more, the kid can make the throws.

I actually might say I think Bradford would be the safer pick, but Stafford has more upside. Just my opinion, which means absolutely nothing.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 12:14 PM
I can see the age argument I guess, but I don't see why anyone would question his experience. He will finish this season with 28 college starts, 4 less than Matt Ryan, who was regarded as very experienced, and more than Joe Flacco had in college.

Also, since Bradford is a finance major with a 3.95 GPA, I think he is smart enough to know that the NPV of a six year, $72M contract with $35M guaranteed is larger than a five year, $30M contract with $15M guaranteed, which is what he could get if he waits until next year's draft after they've restructured the rookie contracts.

I made a comment similar to this to my brother when he last told me about Bradford staying, he just shrugged his shoulders and said that was the story going around. As I said, as an OU fan I hope it is true and he does stay for one or two more years. But Bradford is the only one who knows the answer to that question.

Darth CarlSatan
12-20-2008, 01:27 PM
That.

Chiefs1okie is also the guy who said Mark Sanchez is a shitty prospect so take him for what he's worth...Sanchez is much more prepared for the next level than Bradford is.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 03:53 PM
That.

me thinks you were born a breach baby and you are still coming in on the ass end of everything.

evolve27
12-20-2008, 04:39 PM
They'll take Stafford even though he needs another year in college.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-20-2008, 04:40 PM
It's just funny to me that you take a game to prove your point in which he put up well above average numbers and still say he had a bad performance.

Obviously the greatest Super Bowl performance of all time was by Kurt Warner since he threw for the most yardage, right?

eazyb81
12-20-2008, 04:57 PM
Obviously the greatest Super Bowl performance of all time was by Kurt Warner since he threw for the most yardage, right?

He's not saying Bradford's performance in the UT game was the best ever. He's just saying that it wasn't a horrible game, and I agree with him.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 06:04 PM
Obviously the greatest Super Bowl performance of all time was by Kurt Warner since he threw for the most yardage, right?

The statement was never made that the OU/UT game was one of Bradfords best games. The statement WAS made that it proved he can't handle pressure. My point is simple, he threw for close to 400 yards, and 5 TD's. How is that indicative of a "bad game"? If he posts the exact same numbers BUT they win the game, does that argument of being incompetent still stand? As was mentioned earlier in this thread that game was team loss for OU, not a game Bradford lost because of his alleged poor judgement, bad game skills, and weak arm.

beach tribe
12-20-2008, 06:06 PM
I will jump through the roof if the Lions take Bradford. I'm hoping he plays great, and wins the NC just so that might happen, but the first part is not going to happen so....

OnTheWarpath58
12-20-2008, 06:08 PM
I will jump through the roof if the Lions take Bradford. I'm hoping he plays great, and wins the NC just so that might happen, but the first part is not going to happen so....

Hey, it worked for Jamarcus Russell.

He threw a bunch of balloon-balls around against Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl, and became a #1 pick.

milkman
12-20-2008, 06:51 PM
The statement was never made that the OU/UT game was one of Bradfords best games. The statement WAS made that it proved he can't handle pressure. My point is simple, he threw for close to 400 yards, and 5 TD's. How is that indicative of a "bad game"? If he posts the exact same numbers BUT they win the game, does that argument of being incompetent still stand? As was mentioned earlier in this thread that game was team loss for OU, not a game Bradford lost because of his alleged poor judgement, bad game skills, and weak arm.

No.

The statement made was that in that game, the only game he faced any pressure that I've seen, that he didn't fare well against that pressure, and based on what I've seen, I wouldn't risk a top 5 pick on him.

He didn't prove that he couldn't handle pressure.
He just just didn't show, in what may be the biggest game of his short career to this point, that he didn't handle it well that day.

And once again, you just keep throwing stats out there.

Stats mean jack to me.

I use my eyes.

He didn't lose that game.
But there were crucial plays that he had to make a play to help win that game, and he didn't make those plays.

Mecca
12-20-2008, 07:08 PM
The statement was never made that the OU/UT game was one of Bradfords best games. The statement WAS made that it proved he can't handle pressure. My point is simple, he threw for close to 400 yards, and 5 TD's. How is that indicative of a "bad game"? If he posts the exact same numbers BUT they win the game, does that argument of being incompetent still stand? As was mentioned earlier in this thread that game was team loss for OU, not a game Bradford lost because of his alleged poor judgement, bad game skills, and weak arm.

It proves that a hell of alot more goes into evaluating a QB than his stat lines.

chiefs1okie
12-20-2008, 08:00 PM
You guys are really comical. There were plays made and plays not made by Bradford to argue either side of this debate. It is never going to be conceded by you or I, that the other is correct. I stand by my opinion of Bradford (obviously from the benefit of having seen him play more than you) and you stand by your opinions of him based on the plays of one game. Both of you have made the comments that stats are BS and you don't believe in them, and yet when you start touting the reasons you think someone has the skill sets YOU like, the stats come flowing from you like a tidal wave. Comical. I have enjoyed reading a lot of what you have posted and you make some interesting posts, but your vision is definately jaded and your opinions are most certainly tailored to your whims. You can keep telling me what a huge pile of junk Bradford is and I will continue laughing at your ignorance.

Darth CarlSatan
12-20-2008, 09:41 PM
me thinks you were born a breach baby and you are still coming in on the ass end of everything.

Where ya' been, Boomer Doucher?
I understand. Keeping your 'Lucky Charms' hidden from those pesky kids is a full-time job, yes?

me thinks you were born a breach baby and you are still coming in on the ass end of everything.

Hey, your old lady is my best customer and I give her what she likes; Take it up with her.

Anywho, down to business!

I was actually posting in this thread long before your Bradford Butt-Hurt kicked in.

Let's recap and refresh:


Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?p=5310945#post5310945)
Michael Crabtree
You watch; I bet he ends up in KC. Not that I want him or anything, it just seems like a "Chiefs kind of move".

Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset ;"> Originally Posted by royr17 http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?p=5311043#post5311043)
If they are smart then they take Bradford over Stafford. Bradford I just feel would be a better pro QB than Stafford.
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
I feel I should get a free blow job every time I buy a 40 of St. Ides, but I don't see THAT happening either.

Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset ;"> Originally Posted by frazod http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?p=5311353#post5311353)
Bradford needs to go to a team that I hate, so I can continue hating him. :mad:
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
Agreed. Let the Llama ride his Heisman fame as far away from KC as possible.

Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset ;"> Originally Posted by Sanka http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?p=5311869#post5311869)
I'm with him, he looks like a skinny turd. Plus I can't stand Oklahoma
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
Agreed. Oklahoma is a fucking dump whose main exports include annoying evangelists, and chicks who can't fuck.

Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset ;"> Originally Posted by BigChiefDave http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?p=5312125#post5312125)
Not
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
Agreed. Bradford will make a fine addition to a quality Linebackers sack record.

Now, my turn:

"If Sam Bradford declares for the draft"...


I will:}

!) Wake up

2) Take morning piss

3) Go to work

4) Eat breakfast.

5) Work and listen to sportscast

6) Take lunch

7) Continue working while listening to Petro incrementally obtain his daily douchebaggery.

8) Go home after work and eat dinner.

9) Go online and get nightly fix of Planet Insanity, and

10) Give not two fucks that Sam Bradford has declared for the NFL Draft.

See? There ya' go.


You are fighting a losing battle. I have not once, in the 1,273,284 posts he has made about this subject, seen mecca give any credit at all to Bradford for anything. As far as he is concerned OU could have had a 5th grader throwing behind that O-line and still have put up the same or better numbers that Bradford has. There is just something in him that will not admit that Sam Bradford has the tiniest bit of talent. I won't even debate him anymore because his disregard and blindness to the obvious is almost on an assinine level.

:deevee::deevee::deevee::deevee::deevee::deevee::deevee::deevee::deevee::deevee::deevee::deevee::dee vee::deevee:

Here ya' go little feller, feel free to sing along:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/B1Z8pSXCNFI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/B1Z8pSXCNFI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>




Oh... that game.... the one where the starting middle linebacker (and a damn fine one at that) was lost for the game and the defense struggled while Bradford STILL THREW FOR 5 TD'S. That game?? The one that had Arakpo putting pressure on him all afternoon? That's the one you say he didn't fare too well?

We don't want your boy. Give up, and do it yesterday.

The only throws he made were when no pressure existed? He didn't have to force any throws into tight coverage? Never had to overcome a bad decision or a bad throw and continue to perform? You guys are amazing.

Yes. Yes we are.

FWIW. one of my brothers is an OU alum, graduated with a law degree from there and is an Asst. District Attorney in the Norman/OKC area. He is a booster and has a lot of close ties to several people "in the know". He has told me several times that it is very doubtful that Bradford declares for the draft. So all this debating over him being taken before someone or after someone else is probably a mute discussion anyway. In my opinion even if he does declare, I personally don't think his talent or accomplishments will be questioned as much as his age and experience. As I stated earlier he is a red shirt sophomore, still elligible for two more years at OU. Which, to me anyway, makes his accomplishments to date even that much more impressive. There is no question he is athletic and smart, those points can be confirmed any number of ways. Does he have the talent to be an elite NFL QB? I personally think he does. And the more I watch him play the more I am convinced of that fact, I hope he stays at least through his junior year as a selfish OU fan.

So do we, Okie; so do we.

eazyb81
12-20-2008, 10:17 PM
I thought you were a much more interesting poster when you were crying about everyone picking on you.

Now I see that you're just an annoying douche that is incapable of having an intelligent conversation.

Darth CarlSatan
12-20-2008, 10:37 PM
I thought you were a much more interesting poster when you were crying about everyone picking on you.

Now I see that you're just an annoying douche that is incapable of having an intelligent conversation.

Oh I can have one, I'm just absolutely burnt out on this never ending Quarterback lake of verbal diarrhea that you're so fucking enamored with.

Everybody here has MORE than made their call, and they will not be swayed. But by all means, feel free to keep trying. I hope we can have this discussion everyday for the next 20 years.

I'm annoying to you, because I don't subscribe to the mediocrity you'd like to see drafted in to My House.
I've watched your comments for DAYS on this shit, and I haven't bothered to reply to them because frankly, I think you're the most retarded fucking arm-chair analyst I've ever read on this board.
And, the other guys seem to enjoy debating with you, so I'll let them take the wheel.
When it's time to get serious, I'll get serious.
Until then, please continue to provide us the same tired fucking shit everyday as you always do, and will no doubt continue to do.

eazyb81
12-20-2008, 10:45 PM
Okay, well whenever you decide to make an intelligent take on the QB situation, or frankly any situation, make sure to send me a PM to let me know. Until now, I wasn't sure you could actually make a post that wasn't quoting someone and saying "This" or "That."

Good comeback attempt though. I can't wait until you "get serious."

Darth CarlSatan
12-20-2008, 10:50 PM
Okay, well whenever you decide to make an intelligent take on the QB situation, or frankly any situation, make sure to send me a PM to let me know. Until now, I wasn't sure you could actually make a post that wasn't quoting someone and saying "This" or "That."

Good comeback attempt though. I can't wait until you "get serious."

There's nothing left to TALK ABOUT as it relates to a KC QB draft.

Once again:

ALL HAS BEEN SAID! "El Topico Over-O"! Hello McFly etc.!

Meh.

Tribal Warfare
12-20-2008, 11:55 PM
Okay, well whenever you decide to make an intelligent take on the QB situation, or frankly any situation, make sure to send me a PM to let me know. Until now, I wasn't sure you could actually make a post that wasn't quoting someone and saying "This" or "That."

Good comeback attempt though. I can't wait until you "get serious."


It's Hootie's alternate handle so it isn't surprising

chiefs1okie
12-21-2008, 12:57 AM
I thought you were a much more interesting poster when you were crying about everyone picking on you.

Now I see that you're just an annoying douche that is incapable of having an intelligent conversation.

I agree. I don't recall ever seeing him post anything more intelligent than a manual for third grade insults. That schtick got old some time ago. He is on me now cuz I bitch slapped his little cry baby ass a couple times and feels like he has something to prove. Reminds me of a little napoleonic schizo who feels his value and self worth are measured by the amount of toxic verbage can spew. As far as I am concerned he isn't worth much more than a used condom.

milkman
12-21-2008, 05:42 AM
You guys are really comical. There were plays made and plays not made by Bradford to argue either side of this debate. It is never going to be conceded by you or I, that the other is correct. I stand by my opinion of Bradford (obviously from the benefit of having seen him play more than you) and you stand by your opinions of him based on the plays of one game. Both of you have made the comments that stats are BS and you don't believe in them, and yet when you start touting the reasons you think someone has the skill sets YOU like, the stats come flowing from you like a tidal wave. Comical. I have enjoyed reading a lot of what you have posted and you make some interesting posts, but your vision is definately jaded and your opinions are most certainly tailored to your whims. You can keep telling me what a huge pile of junk Bradford is and I will continue laughing at your ignorance.

Go back and show me where I tout all these stats.

the Talking Can
12-21-2008, 05:53 AM
It's Hootie's alternate handle so it isn't surprising

i thought it was claythan's...but that kind of vagina weeping sounds like hootie....

Darth CarlSatan
12-21-2008, 02:38 PM
I agree. I don't recall ever seeing him post anything more intelligent than a manual for third grade insults. That schtick got old some time ago. He is on me now cuz I bitch slapped his little cry baby ass a couple times and feels like he has something to prove. Reminds me of a little napoleonic schizo who feels his value and self worth are measured by the amount of toxic verbage can spew. As far as I am concerned he isn't worth much more than a used condom.

You didn't bitch-slap shit, mouth. Now; how do you feel about resuming our bet, you little sack of shit?

Darth CarlSatan
12-21-2008, 02:45 PM
i thought it was claythan's...but that kind of vagina weeping sounds like hootie....

You want in on this bet too? Huh? Mouth?

You wanna' gamble your privileges?

Darth CarlSatan
12-21-2008, 02:46 PM
Okay, well whenever you decide to make an intelligent take on the QB situation, or frankly any situation, make sure to send me a PM to let me know. Until now, I wasn't sure you could actually make a post that wasn't quoting someone and saying "This" or "That."

Good comeback attempt though. I can't wait until you "get serious."

How's about you? You want on-board too?

googlegoogle
12-21-2008, 02:46 PM
bradford = thigpen

Darth CarlSatan
12-21-2008, 02:47 PM
bradford = thigpen

Nah, Thigpen's better.

Darth CarlSatan
12-21-2008, 06:26 PM
Mmmm......

Annnnnnnnd... the room

SHUTS THE FUCK UP.


Thought so. Ladies.

lazepoo
12-21-2008, 07:57 PM
Agree, but I've noticed the tendency on this board is to take one position and fight to the death for it, instead of acknowledging that there could be more than one positive choice.

I'd be thrilled with Stafford or Bradford at this point.

Frankly, if an NFL team has a QB rated as a first round talent, he's worth drafting. There's no formula to figure out which ones are thrive and which will fold. I think we can all agree that the team could use more talent regardless, and if pro scouts think that someone has first round talent, it's worth a shot. What's the worst that happens? Clark Hunt loses some money and we suck next year, too?

eazyb81
12-21-2008, 09:45 PM
How's about you? You want on-board too?

Oh boy, a message board bet. That's novel. Were you planning on explaining this awesome, bodacious bet you are proposing?

Every post you make just adds a level of toolishness. I'm never seen someone post in such a flamboyantly gay manner.

Darth CarlSatan
12-21-2008, 09:55 PM
Oh boy, a message board bet. That's novel. Were you planning on explaining this awesome, bodacious bet you are proposing?

Every post you make just adds a level of toolishness. I'm never seen someone post in such a flamboyantly gay manner.

I'm betting you can suck your own dick.

Oh wait; wrong bet!

OkieFag knows what it's ALL about; dont'-cha boy?

Oh well, for the utterly retarded who can't follow the thread( you ), it breaks down as follows:

Oklahoma Faggot once wanted me to take OSU in the OU-OSU game as a bet.
The winner got to stay a member of this forum. The loser had to pack it up and leave.

For good.

Now; since you, said Oklahoma Faggot, and Talking Shit-Can want to hype up your love of the Llama-looking Bradford, I say "let's do it for real".

Back your mouth up, or shut the fuck up.

I take Florida, you take OU; final score determines the winner.

Now which one of you half a pussies are ready to play?

Darth CarlSatan
12-21-2008, 10:06 PM
All was quiet on the "I have balls"-front....

eazyb81
12-21-2008, 10:14 PM
So in your eyes, you have to love the team to love the player?

Why would I even care about the OU - Florida game? Do you understand the difference between evaluating a player's pro prospects and being a fanboy for his respective team? I'm a Mizzou fan - I can't stand OU.

It will be interesting to see how he handles the speed on Florida's defense. However, OU winning or losing will have absolutely no effect on Bradford's pro prospects or potential.

Darth CarlSatan
12-21-2008, 10:20 PM
So in your eyes, you have to love the team to love the player?

Why would I even care about the OU - Florida game? Do you understand the difference between evaluating a player's pro prospects and being a fanboy for his respective team? I'm a Mizzou fan - I can't stand OU.

It will be interesting to see how he handles the speed on Florida's defense. However, OU winning or losing will have absolutely no effect on Bradford's pro prospects or potential.

Bradford will suck in the NFL, he will get killed, and he is the wrong choice for Kansas City.

That's all there is to it.