PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft Bradford Please


Pages : [1] 2

jAZ
01-08-2009, 10:07 PM
I don't think he's coming out, but he's my choice in the QB dice-roll.

88TG88
01-08-2009, 10:08 PM
nah

Reerun_KC
01-08-2009, 10:08 PM
ROFL

This is going to go well....

Please tell me your just making that up?

Thig Lyfe
01-08-2009, 10:10 PM
Tebow

Dr. Facebook Fever
01-08-2009, 10:13 PM
Reesing

jAZ
01-08-2009, 10:13 PM
I am among the least qualified people on this board to have an opinion on this, but in reality, I think I'm tied with 3/4 of the board for that title.

But the kid looks like he could be Trent Green 2.0. I would welcome that.

crazycoffey
01-08-2009, 10:13 PM
second pick, if we miss staford, sure

Thig Lyfe
01-08-2009, 10:14 PM
Chase McDanielson

Fritz88
01-08-2009, 10:16 PM
Condi Rice

DeezNutz
01-08-2009, 10:17 PM
I am among the least qualified people on this board to have an opinion on this, but in reality, I think I'm tied with 3/4 of the board for that title.

But the kid looks like he could be Trent Green 2.0. I would welcome that.

You'd draft Trent Green #3 overall?

petegz28
01-08-2009, 10:18 PM
I don't think he's coming out, but he's my choice in the QB dice-roll.

Not at #3. Nope. Wouldn't be prudent at this juncture.

Dr. Facebook Fever
01-08-2009, 10:19 PM
You'd draft Trent Green #3 overall?

You could do worse.

Green>Leaf

Green>Harrington

Pitt Gorilla
01-08-2009, 10:20 PM
Not at #3. Nope. Wouldn't be prudent at this juncture.Nuh, gunna, dua.

jAZ
01-08-2009, 10:21 PM
You'd draft Trent Green #3 overall?

If we drafted a QB at #3 and got the Trent Green we all know from his time in KC for 10+ years, our #3 pick would be the draft pick in franchise history.

MIAdragon
01-08-2009, 10:23 PM
Is it just me or does Bradford have a Vince Young-esk throwing motion?

KCChiefsMan
01-08-2009, 10:24 PM
not a good showing tonight with Bradford. I don't think I want him now

the Talking Can
01-08-2009, 10:25 PM
stafford would get killed here if he played like this....

KevB
01-08-2009, 10:25 PM
Is it just me or does Bradford have a Vince Young-esk throwing motion?

It's just you. And besides, I don't care if he throws it out of his a$$ if he's as accurate as Bradford has been to date.

jAZ
01-08-2009, 10:26 PM
not a good showing tonight with Bradford. I don't think I want him now

I thought his last INT was a perfectly thrown pass. That was on the WR. I heard the one at halftime, I didn't see but I heard it was batted 4-5 times.

Reerun_KC
01-08-2009, 10:26 PM
stafford would get killed here if he played like this....

Stafford plays in a spread? When did that happen?

jAZ
01-08-2009, 10:28 PM
stafford would get killed here if he played like this....

I just sat down and have been watching for the last 30 minutes. He's done pretty well from what I've seen. If OU's D can hold FL, I'm betting he brings OU back to win at the end.

DeezNutz
01-08-2009, 10:28 PM
If we drafted a QB at #3 and got the Trent Green we all know from his time in KC for 10+ years, our #3 pick would be the draft pick in franchise history.

What? 10+ years? You mean 6?

I'm assuming you meant best pick in franchise history. No to that, too.

petegz28
01-08-2009, 10:30 PM
Nuh, gunna, dua.

:LOL:

LMAO

jAZ
01-08-2009, 10:30 PM
What? 10+ years? You mean 6?

I'm assuming you meant best pick in franchise history. No to that, too.
Huh?

I think I'll stick with whatI said, because I don't get your question.

Thig Lyfe
01-08-2009, 10:32 PM
What? 10+ years? You mean 6?

I'm assuming you meant best pick in franchise history. No to that, too.

I think he means Stafford playing as well as Trent Green for 10+ years.

DeezNutz
01-08-2009, 10:34 PM
I think he means Stafford playing as well as Trent Green for 10+ years.

Gotcha.

Still no.

jAZ
01-08-2009, 10:39 PM
What? 10+ years? You mean 6?

I'm assuming you meant best pick in franchise history. No to that, too.

I think he means Stafford playing as well as Trent Green for 10+ years.

Gotcha.

Still no.

I'll try to say that again.

If we pick a QB at #3 overall... and they are as good as the Trent Green we remember playing here in KC... and that QB can play at that TG level for 10+ years... We'd have the best draft pick in Franchise history.

I'd be prefectly happy with whoever we draft giving us Trent Green level of play.

jAZ
01-08-2009, 10:41 PM
If OU's D can hold FL, I'm betting he brings OU back to win at the end.
They couldn't, but he couldn't even complete a short pass on that last drive. Not what I was expecting at the end, that's for sure.

Reerun_KC
01-08-2009, 10:42 PM
Uh Bradford NO!

Thig Lyfe
01-08-2009, 10:42 PM
I think he means Stafford playing as well as Trent Green for 10+ years.

Bradford, rather.

DeezNutz
01-08-2009, 10:45 PM
I'll try to say that again.

If we pick a QB at #3 overall... and they are as good as the Trent Green we remember playing here in KC... and that QB can play at that TG level for 10+ years... We'd have the best draft pick in Franchise history.

I'd be prefectly happy with whoever we draft giving us Trent Green level of play.

Yeah, I'm not sure. It certainly wouldn't be a wasted pick and would provide much needed stability. However, I would like someone with a higher ceiling, bigger upside. A franchise guy, not a very good system guy.

Again, even if your scenario would unfold, it wouldn't be the best pick in franchise history. Not even close. We have to start talking HOF players.

Fat Elvis
01-08-2009, 10:46 PM
I thought his last INT was a perfectly thrown pass. That was on the WR. I heard the one at halftime, I didn't see but I heard it was batted 4-5 times.


That one was a perfectly thrown pass as well. It bounced off the reciever's numbers in tight coverage. It was batted around 4-5 times because he was able to thread it through about 3 defenders. I was wowed by Bradford's accuracy.

Sure-Oz
01-08-2009, 10:49 PM
Hell no to bradford

KChiefs1
01-08-2009, 10:51 PM
TIM TEBOW!!!!!!

DeezNutz
01-08-2009, 10:52 PM
I'd like to see him play with about 15 more pounds of muscle on him. Dude's arms look like twigs. Seriously. He looks like wuss.

Fruit Ninja
01-08-2009, 10:53 PM
lol, I find it funny everytime someone doesnt have a crazy good game, they dontwant him based on 1 game. lol

Mr. Arrowhead
01-08-2009, 10:54 PM
I thought his last INT was a perfectly thrown pass. That was on the WR. I heard the one at halftime, I didn't see but I heard it was batted 4-5 times.
except for the fact that he stared down the WR big time

the Talking Can
01-08-2009, 10:54 PM
he should stay in school, lots to work on

DeezNutz
01-08-2009, 10:55 PM
lol, I find it funny everytime someone doesnt have a crazy good game, they dontwant him based on 1 game. lol

You can't mean this with respect to Bradford. This pessimism about his transition to the NFL has been a recurring point of discussion on this board.

the Talking Can
01-08-2009, 10:55 PM
except for the fact that he stared down the WR big time

and threw the ball late, when the WR ran into double coverage

it was a poor throw

DeezNutz
01-08-2009, 10:55 PM
he should stay in school, lots to work on

And this starts with living in the weight room.

He stays and Sanchez goes.

Sure-Oz
01-08-2009, 10:56 PM
That said, Lions better draft him

Sure-Oz
01-08-2009, 10:56 PM
And this starts with living in the weight room.

He stays and Sanchez goes.

That would be a dream and guarantee we got 1 of the 2 main guys

DJ's left nut
01-08-2009, 10:57 PM
Funny how people can watch the same game and see such different things.

Bradford is as good as any college QB I've seen at putting the ball where he wants to. He's just unbelievably accurate. He throws a tight ball and has a great head on his shoulders.

The kid looks a lot like Pennington before the shoulder injuries. Remember, before his arm got jacked up, CP was the next big thing. I'd take Bradford at #3 in a heartbeat. I still like Stafford a little more, but I like Bradford more than Sanchez (blasphemer!!) Get him on a weight program, plug him in for the last few games of '09 and ready to rock in '10.

BigMeatballDave
01-08-2009, 10:57 PM
If you could choose between him, Stafford, or Sanchez, why on earth would anyone pick Bradford?

Tribal Warfare
01-08-2009, 10:58 PM
he should stay in school, lots to work on

Bradford didn't have a bad game his WRs decided to choke at critical moments

Sure-Oz
01-08-2009, 10:58 PM
He should stay put

BigMeatballDave
01-08-2009, 10:58 PM
I am among the least qualified people on this board to have an opinion on this, but in reality, I think I'm tied with 3/4 of the board for that title.

But the kid looks like he could be Trent Green 2.0. I would welcome that.Trent's success was a product of the monster line we had. Period.

the Talking Can
01-08-2009, 10:59 PM
Funny how people can watch the same game and see such different things.

Bradford is as good as any college QB I've seen at putting the ball where he wants to. He's just unbelievably accurate. He throws a tight ball and has a great head on his shoulders.

The kid looks a lot like Pennington before the shoulder injuries. Remember, before his arm got jacked up, CP was the next big thing. I'd take Bradford at #3 in a heartbeat. I still like Stafford a little more, but I like Bradford more than Sanchez (blasphemer!!) Get him on a weight program, plug him in for the last few games of '09 and ready to rock in '10.

he's accurate when he has great protection....when he has pressure, not so much as tonight made clear...hell Tebow is much better under pressure than Bradford...and I wouldn't draft tebow to play qb

DeezNutz
01-08-2009, 10:59 PM
That would be a dream and guarantee we got 1 of the 2 main guys

Yep. Everyone talks about Bradford's frame being able to put on more weight, but I'm not convinced this is a certainty. He needs to return and prove he's not Croyle-like physically.

Chiefnj2
01-08-2009, 10:59 PM
Bradford is very accurate and throws a great ball. As a pure passer he's better than Sanchez and Stafford. But, he needs a ton of work. He should go back to school. If he declares he'll have to sit an entire year. On two key plays he threw short to guys that were covered.

DJ's left nut
01-08-2009, 10:59 PM
If you could choose between him, Stafford, or Sanchez, why on earth would anyone pick Bradford?

Because accuracy wins football games and Bradford's the most accurate passer, without question.

crazycoffey
01-08-2009, 10:59 PM
and threw the ball late, when the WR ran into double coverage

it was a poor throw


I'm not a bradford fan, but now I'm not sure we watched the same game. Bradford was threading the needle all over the field. His WR's let him down. I've seen that same throw sprout excessive man love when trent threw it to Tony several times....

Sure-Oz
01-08-2009, 11:00 PM
Trent's success was a product of the monster line we had. Period.

This

I'd rather have a possible Aikman or Elway than a Green

DJ's left nut
01-08-2009, 11:01 PM
he's accurate when he has great protection....when he has pressure, not so much as tonight made clear...hell Tebow is much better under pressure than Bradford...and I wouldn't draft tebow to play qb

This is nonsense. He made a great TD throw under pressure, his other TD throw was setup by another strong throw under pressure.

I think y'all just work backwards. "That was a good throw, he must not have been under pressure." "Man, that throw sucked, must've been pressure."

The anti-bradford folks are more guilty of seeing what they want to see that Carl Peterson ever was.

Nevermind the fact that the point of the game is to provide your QB protection. We don't draft a QB for what he can do with 1 second in the pocket. When given average time in the pocket, he made great throws. That's what he'll need at the next level and that's something we damn sure better be providing any QB we bring in. He threw the best ball when given okay time of anyone in CFB this year. Today he made many good throws with pressure on him. That's absolutely a guy worth having.

MahiMike
01-08-2009, 11:05 PM
My choice is Bradford too. Of all the throws I saw tonite, His were all right on the money or damn close to it. Neither pick was his fault. Unlike Tebow who stared down his guys and threw right to the defense. I'd be ok w/Bradford.

MahiMike
01-08-2009, 11:06 PM
This

I'd rather have a possible Aikman or Elway than a Green

Maybe so but Trent was the best QB this franchise ever had.

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:09 PM
Bradford didn't have a bad game his WRs decided to choke at critical moments

:clap: I think people on here watched a different game. Kid is good, I wasn't big on him but he showed some shit tonight.

RustShack
01-08-2009, 11:10 PM
Trent's success was a product of the monster line we had. Period.

Sounds like Bradford at Oklahoma, except Bustford also is the product of the spread offense on top of that.

Mr. Arrowhead
01-08-2009, 11:10 PM
Memo to Detroit
Just look at the stats they are undeniable, how can you not draft Bradford, you dont want Stafford.

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:10 PM
I'm not a bradford fan, but now I'm not sure we watched the same game. Bradford was threading the needle all over the field. His WR's let him down. I've seen that same throw sprout excessive man love when trent threw it to Tony several times....

We watched the same game.

RustShack
01-08-2009, 11:11 PM
He played like Stafford does all year, under pressure and WR's not playing all that great. Difference is Stafford does a better job playing under pressure and doesn't play in the spread offense. Oh he also has the physical tools Bustford doesn't have.

crazycoffey
01-08-2009, 11:14 PM
He played like Stafford does all year, under pressure and WR's not playing all that great. Difference is Stafford does a better job playing under pressure and doesn't play in the spread offense. Oh he also has the physical tools Bustford doesn't have.


does this have to turn into a bradford vs. stafford debate? Most of us are saying Bradford impressed us tonight, did better than we expected, surprised us. Nothing you or I say will influence our draft pick. Instead, maybe stay on topic and talk about how/why Bradford didn't impress you. Nothing to do with IF he's better than stafford, or anyone else.

For now anyway, just a thought....

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:19 PM
He played like Stafford does all year, under pressure and WR's not playing all that great. Difference is Stafford does a better job playing under pressure and doesn't play in the spread offense. Oh he also has the physical tools Bustford doesn't have.

That is the dumbest fucking thing I have seen. You have no clue what he is, no one does. He is my 3rd favorite QB in the draft (if all come out), but just because I like a couple guys before him does not make him a bust. He can make the throws, is a great athlete, and has a good head on his shoulders. Had two picks tonight, that I wouldn't credit to him. Kid has game, don't know if it will translate to the NFL, but either do you.

I was watching at the bar, and thinking the whole time, that this place would probably be giving him some props. Well fuck, I should have knew better then that.

This was a hell of a game, if you like someone else better, fine. Come on guys, give credit where credit id due.

beach tribe
01-08-2009, 11:20 PM
I've been blasting Bradford all season. I had watched some of his games, and it always seemed as if he was throwing to a spot on the field. Today he threw some good balls into tight coverage, His receivers let him down a few times, and he still gets flustrated under pressure, but I don't fear us selecting him near as much. The kid has talent, and he did take some snaps from under center. I won't flip if puts on the ketchup, and mustard.

beach tribe
01-08-2009, 11:22 PM
I'm not a bradford fan, but now I'm not sure we watched the same game. Bradford was threading the needle all over the field. His WR's let him down. I've seen that same throw sprout excessive man love when trent threw it to Tony several times....

Eerily similar post to mine. I swear I didn't read one response of this thread before making my mine.

EDit: I still prefer Stafford by a wide margin

KcMizzou
01-08-2009, 11:23 PM
That is the dumbest ****ing thing I have seen. You have no clue what he is, no one does. He is my 3rd favorite QB in the draft (if all come out), but just because I like a couple guys before him does not make him a bust. He can make the throws, is a great athlete, and has a good head on his shoulders. Had two picks tonight, that I wouldn't credit to him. Kid has game, don't know if it will translate to the NFL, but either do you.

I was watching at the bar, and thinking the whole time, that this place would probably be giving him some props. Well ****, I should have knew better then that.

This was a hell of a game, if you like someone else better, fine. Come on guys, give credit where credit id due.It's kinda "all or nothing" here. We deal in extremes.

My personal wish list is...

Sanchez
Stafford
Bradford

But to be honest, I'd be excited about any of those 3. It's about time the Chiefs went "balls out" and went after a franchise QB.

L.A. Chieffan
01-08-2009, 11:25 PM
:ZZZ:

Mr. Kotter
01-08-2009, 11:25 PM
:LOL::LOL::LOL:

L.A. Chieffan
01-08-2009, 11:25 PM
TEbow all the way homie. Duel threat FTW

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:31 PM
It's kinda "all or nothing" here. We deal in extremes.

My personal wish list is...

Sanchez
Stafford
Bradford

But to be honest, I'd be excited about any of those 3. It's about time the Chiefs went "balls out" and went after a franchise QB.

Exactly, I'm not understanding the whole - I like this guy so that guy fucking sucks, sure bust.

Mr. Kotter
01-08-2009, 11:31 PM
TEbow all the way homie. Duel threat FTW

Maybe we can get Switzer to be the HC. The return of the "Option" in the NFL...we can lead the movement, baby!!!! :cuss:

crazycoffey
01-08-2009, 11:31 PM
Eerily similar post to mine. I swear I didn't read one response of this thread before making my mine.

EDit: I still prefer Stafford by a wide margin

I don't know if I've seen enough of stafford, I like what I hear about him, certainly wouldn't say I don't want him. I just want a good QB that stays healthy plays good games, has a strong desire to win and is talented enough to make all the throws.

all three could easily end up fitting that bill, IMO. Bradford did well tonight, I was surprised. I tried to put my biases aside and just watch him as neutral as I could too.

cdcox
01-08-2009, 11:32 PM
Down the stretch, OU did not call a single play where Bradford had to make a read. They were all set plays where the ball was going to one guy. He had happy feet on a lot of his throws. When he's drafted he needs to sit on the bench for a year. The next year you can let him hold a clip board. The next year you might start him, but he'll get his skinny ass broke in two in week 3.

When he rolled out he was a high stepping dandy.

Just didn't look like an NFL QB in the least.

KCChiefsFan88
01-08-2009, 11:32 PM
Eerily similar post to mine. I swear I didn't read one response of this thread before making my mine.

EDit: I still prefer Stafford by a wide margin

Have you seen Stafford play? He was a mediocre QB for most of his career (until this year) and runs the most un-NFL like offense of the big 3 (Sanchez, Bradford and Stafford).

L.A. Chieffan
01-08-2009, 11:33 PM
Maybe we can get Switzer to be the HC. The return of the "Option" in the NFL...we can lead the movement, baby!!!! :cuss:

Id be down, harcore thugs and and Jesus is how we do it

okcchief
01-08-2009, 11:33 PM
I would be happy with any of the three. Any of them could be good. Any of them could be a bust.

Time will tell.

StcChief
01-08-2009, 11:33 PM
2010. QB for Chiefs

BigMeatballDave
01-08-2009, 11:33 PM
Have you seen Stafford play? He was a mediocre QB for most of his career (until this year) and runs the most un-NFL like offense of the big 3 (Sanchez, Bradford and Stafford).WTF?

OnTheWarpath58
01-08-2009, 11:33 PM
Exactly, I'm not understanding the whole - I like this guy so that guy fucking sucks, sure bust.

I can't say Bradford is going to be a bust, but if I'm a GM, I'm not making a $60M investment in a kid that is going to have to be taught how to take snaps from center, learn 3, 5 and 7 step drops and actually read a defense, pre and post snap.

Sanchez
Stafford





Bradford

cdcox
01-08-2009, 11:35 PM
I can't say Bradford is going to be a bust, but if I'm a GM, I'm not making a $60M investment in a kid that is going to have to be taught how to take snaps from center, learn 3, 5 and 7 step drops and actually read a defense, pre and post snap.

Sanchez
Stafford





Bradford

Your enter key must have broke after the sixth time you hit it after Stafford.

L.A. Chieffan
01-08-2009, 11:36 PM
WTF?

Hes blinded by TEbows awesomeness. Its understandable.

OnTheWarpath58
01-08-2009, 11:36 PM
Your enter key must have broke after the sixth time you hit it after Stafford.

LMAO

googlegoogle
01-08-2009, 11:38 PM
Most of Bradfords throws are to 'spots' and not players. It's like Vermeil's system.

Guess that make him kinda like Trent Green; Not a strong arm-Pretty good accuracy.

Just an Ok qb.

Worthy of a 3rd pick? Come on. Baltimore got Flacco in the 2nd.

OnTheWarpath58
01-08-2009, 11:39 PM
Most of Bradfords throws are to 'spots' and not players. It's like Vermeil's system.

Guess that make him kinda like Trent Green; Not a strong arm-Pretty good accuracy.

Just an Ok qb.

Worthy of a 3rd pick? Come on. Baltimore got Flacco in the 2nd.


Flacco was drafted 18th overall.

L.A. Chieffan
01-08-2009, 11:39 PM
Most of Bradfords throws are to 'spots' and not players. It's like Vermeil's system.

Guess that make him kinda like Trent Green; Not a strong arm-Pretty good accuracy.

Just an Ok qb.

Worthy of a 3rd pick? Come on. Baltimore got Flacco in the 2nd.

Close , they got him in the 1st but you know...

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:40 PM
I can't say Bradford is going to be a bust, but if I'm a GM, I'm not making a $60M investment in a kid that is going to have to be taught how to take snaps from center, learn 3, 5 and 7 step drops and actually read a defense, pre and post snap.

Sanchez
Stafford





Bradford

I know what your saying, and I think you know I am pretty much in the same boat as you. If anything I am a little higher on Bradford than you are. One thing though, it's not a pro style offense, but he does take several snaps under center.

Let me ask you this, and be honest, did you watch him play much last year? If so, he went down field a lot more, made some incredible throws. This year he didn't have to so much.

He has a long way to go, but I just get sick of people not giving credit when it's obvious that he has some serious potential.

L.A. Chieffan
01-08-2009, 11:41 PM
Urban Meyer is a ventriloquist? I did not know that.

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:42 PM
Most of Bradfords throws are to 'spots' and not players. It's like Vermeil's system.

Guess that make him kinda like Trent Green; Not a strong arm-Pretty good accuracy.

Just an Ok qb.

Worthy of a 3rd pick? Come on. Baltimore got Flacco in the 2nd.

2nd.........:LOL:

Chiefnj2
01-08-2009, 11:44 PM
I didn't expect Bradford to throw the ball so well. I also didn't expect him to be on such a short leash. He's the least NFL ready of the three but has a pretty high ceiling.

OnTheWarpath58
01-08-2009, 11:46 PM
I know what your saying, and I think you know I am pretty much in the same boat as you. If anything I am a little higher on Bradford than you are. One thing though, it's not a pro style offense, but he does take several snaps under center.

Let me ask you this, and be honest, did you watch him play mush last year? If so, he went down field a lot more, made some incredible throws. This year he didn't have to do so much.

He has a long way to go, but I just get sick of people not giving credit when it's obvious that he has some serious potential.

I'm one of the few people that refuse to make that ridiculous comment that he doesn't make NFL-caliber throws. He does, but he's not required to nearly as often as Sanchez and Stafford.

He's obviously a talented college QB, but he has more going against him in regards to becoming a NFL QB compared to the other two.

Playing in a pro style offense is a HUGE advantage for Stafford and Sanchez.

Does Bradford have potential?

Absolutely.

But is that potential worth a $60M investment and a top draft pick, knowing that he has a hill to climb right out of the box, learning how to take snaps, use proper footwork on drops, and read defenses pre/post snap?

Bradford has potential, I'm just not sure it's going to be realized early enough to make him worth that large of a financial investment.

Even Herbstreit and Corso said he's going to have a large learning curve if he does declare.

cdcox
01-08-2009, 11:47 PM
Montana's arm and Jake Plummer's head. I don't see it.

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:48 PM
I'm one of the few people that refuse to make that ridiculous comment that he doesn't make NFL-caliber throws. He does, but he's not required to nearly as often as Sanchez and Stafford.

He's obviously a talented college QB, but he has more going against him in regards to becoming a NFL QB compared to the other two.

Playing in a pro style offense is a HUGE advantage for Stafford and Sanchez.

Does Bradford have potential?

Absolutely.

But is that potential worth a $60M investment and a top draft pick, knowing that he has a hill to climb right out of the box, learning how to take snaps, use proper footwork on drops, and read defenses pre/post snap?

Bradford has potential, I'm just not sure it's going to be realized early enough to make him worth that large of a financial investment.

Even Herbstreit and Corso said he's going to have a large learning curve if he does declare.

I agree. Though while I agree Tebow put this game on his back and took control, could they suck him off any more?

L.A. Chieffan
01-08-2009, 11:50 PM
I agree. Though while I agree Tebow put this game on his back and took control, could they suck him off any more?

I love TEbow. He got robbed on the Heisman this game proves it.

OnTheWarpath58
01-08-2009, 11:50 PM
I agree. Though while I agree Tebow put this game on his back and took control, could they suck him off any more?

Eh.

Doesn't bother me, the kid has earned it, IMO.

A Heisman trophy and 2 NC's.

The kid is obviously the heart and soul of that team.

He just finds a way to win.

beach tribe
01-08-2009, 11:50 PM
Have you seen Stafford play? He was a mediocre QB for most of his career (until this year) and runs the most un-NFL like offense of the big 3 (Sanchez, Bradford and Stafford).

I've watched at least 6 games this year of Stafford's, and I think you're wrong.

Dude is the best prospect, in the realm of what I look for, that I have seen since Plamer.

Disclaimer: I'm just a man with an opinion.

KCChiefsFan88
01-08-2009, 11:51 PM
WTF?

Try educating yourself about how overrated Stafford is and how (until late last season) he was considered a disappointment... considering how highly recruited he was coming out of high school.

Stafford completed barely over 55% of his passes last season and was horrible his freshman year (52% completion %, 7 TDs compared to 13 INTs).

In his two biggest games of the season this year... against Alabama and Florida (the two most NFL-caliber defenses he faced this year) Stafford was average at best (completing just over 57% of his passes) against Alabama and was horrible (under 55% completion %, 0 TD and 3 INTs) against Florida.

Both of those games were also losses.

Stafford is a fraud.

cdcox
01-08-2009, 11:51 PM
I agree. Though while I agree Tebow put this game on his back and took control, could they suck him off any more?

If you're talking about the NFL, Tebow is irrelevant. If you're talking about tonight's game, he deserved all the praise.

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:51 PM
I love TEbow. He got robbed on the Heisman this game proves it.

Robbed. I'm not going that far.

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:52 PM
If you're talking about the NFL, Tebow is irrelevant. If you're talking about tonight's game, he deserved all the praise.

I said he deserves credit, but are you watching this.....come on

beach tribe
01-08-2009, 11:54 PM
Try educating yourself about how overrated Stafford is and how (until late last season) he was considered a disappointment... considering how highly recruited he was coming out of high school.

Stafford completed barely over 55% of his passes last season and was horrible his freshman year (52% completion %, 7 TDs compared to 13 INTs).

In his two biggest games of the season this year... against Alabama and Florida (the two most NFL-caliber defenses he faced this year) Stafford was average at best (completing just over 57% of his passes) against Alabama and was horrible (under 55% completion %, 0 TD and 3 INTs) against Florida.

Both of those games were also losses.

Stafford is a fraud.

You may be right, but I don't see it. I love football......We'll see.

DJ's left nut
01-08-2009, 11:55 PM
Montana's arm and Jake Plummer's head. I don't see it.

Stafford = Ryan Leaf's composure and Todd Marinovich's resume.

See, I can make baseless comparisons too.

OnTheWarpath58
01-08-2009, 11:55 PM
Try educating yourself about how overrated Stafford is and how (until late last season) he was considered a disappointment... considering how highly recruited he was coming out of high school.

Stafford completed barely over 55% of his passes last season and was horrible his freshman year (52% completion %, 7 TDs compared to 13 INTs).

In his two biggest games of the season this year... against Alabama and Florida (the two most NFL-caliber defenses he faced this year) Stafford was average at best (completing just over 57% of his passes) against Alabama and was horrible (under 55% completion %, 0 TD and 3 INTs) against Florida.

Both of those games were also losses.

Stafford is a fraud.

I don't have too much of an issue with your post, other than the use of the word fraud.

Stafford did seem to have his worst games against the best competition.

I had a post a while back about his stats against the top half of the SEC and the bottom half of the SEC. He basically beat up on the weak sisters, and struggled mightily against the good teams.

However, I have to ask WTF you meant by this:

[QUOTE]Have you seen Stafford play? He was a mediocre QB for most of his career (until this year) and runs the most un-NFL like offense of the big 3 (Sanchez, Bradford and Stafford).

Georgia runs a pro offense. As does USC.

Oklahoma doesn't run anything resembling a pro offense. (unless your name is lil stumppy)

smittysbar
01-08-2009, 11:57 PM
I don't have too much of an issue with your post, other than the use of the word fraud.

Stafford did seem to have his worst games against the best competition.

I had a post a while back about his stats against the top half of the SEC and the bottom half of the SEC. He basically beat up on the weak sisters, and struggled mightily against the good teams.

However, I have to ask WTF you meant by this:

[quote]Have you seen Stafford play? He was a mediocre QB for most of his career (until this year) and runs the most un-NFL like offense of the big 3 (Sanchez, Bradford and Stafford).

Georgia runs a pro offense. As does USC.

Oklahoma doesn't run anything resembling a pro offense. (unless your name is lil stumppy)

Very true

cdcox
01-08-2009, 11:58 PM
I said he deserves credit, but are you watching this.....come on

I heard them call him one of the top 5 to 10 college football players of all time. All time is a long time, especially in college ball, and I haven't watched that much college ball. So I really can't say. He doesn't wow you, but he's money.

smittysbar
01-09-2009, 12:01 AM
I heard them call him one of the top 5 to 10 college football players of all time. All time is a long time, especially in college ball, and I haven't watched that much college ball. So I really can't say. He doesn't wow you, but he's money.

IMO they took that way to far. He did wow me tonight.

StcChief
01-09-2009, 12:02 AM
IMO they took that way to far. He did wow me tonight.yeah. the announcers view point may be 30 years?

googlegoogle
01-09-2009, 12:03 AM
Try educating yourself about how overrated Stafford is and how (until late last season) he was considered a disappointment... considering how highly recruited he was coming out of high school.

Stafford completed barely over 55% of his passes last season and was horrible his freshman year (52% completion %, 7 TDs compared to 13 INTs).

In his two biggest games of the season this year... against Alabama and Florida (the two most NFL-caliber defenses he faced this year) Stafford was average at best (completing just over 57% of his passes) against Alabama and was horrible (under 55% completion %, 0 TD and 3 INTs) against Florida.

Both of those games were also losses.

Stafford is a fraud.


completion % doesn't matter. Stafford makes great throws.

beach tribe
01-09-2009, 12:03 AM
I heard them call him one of the top 5 to 10 college football players of all time. All time is a long time, especially in college ball, and I haven't watched that much college ball. So I really can't say. He doesn't wow you, but he's money.

The fact that he has the accolades of the 5-10 best college football players of all time really can't be argued. The rest is...well...opinion,

cdcox
01-09-2009, 12:13 AM
Stafford = Ryan Leaf's composure and Todd Marinovich's resume.

See, I can make baseless comparisons too.

At least mine was based in observables.

Does Bradford have a good enough arm to make it to the HOF? Yes, with a great football brain. Does he have a great arm that you are going to write about all day? And can that arm be the basis on which you build an NFL career, ala Elway?

Does Bradford have a strong feel for the game where he can walk up to the LOS and know where the ball needs to go? No, he's always looking over to the side line. Is the NFL going to put him in the spread 80% of his plays? Maybe if they have Randy Moss and Wes Welker.

Does he have great mechanics?

Brandford has great accuracy. And that is huge. But I don't think that alone is enough to build an NFL career.

Watch his play. Ignore his statistics other than completion percentage (which I believe translates from the college game to the pros). Ignore the wins and losses. His understanding of offense is pretty limited compared to Montana, P. Manning, Brady, Jaws, etc. And he doesn't have the physical tools that Elway, Favre, Marino, etc had. He lacks the a critical number of traits that you can build on. Upper end = a little better than Chad Pennington. That is my call.

smittysbar
01-09-2009, 12:13 AM
can anyone get a replay of that first long ball by Bradford were the reciever got fucking smoked?

I thought it was clean at first (great throw BTW), but when I saw the replay it looked like he was there early, looked like the ball actually hit the defender in the back, which would mean he was defiantly there early.

Just curious, I looked in the game thread and it seemed that only a couple thought it was PI.

Mecca
01-09-2009, 12:14 AM
One thing I noticed about Bradford tonight was he just lacked zip on the ball all of his passes were lobbish even the short ones.

Sam Hall
01-09-2009, 12:15 AM
One thing I noticed about Bradford tonight was he just lacked zip on the ball all of his passes were lobbish even the short ones.

That's one of the main reasons I'd be more comfortable with Sanchez.

smittysbar
01-09-2009, 12:17 AM
One thing I noticed about Bradford tonight was he just lacked zip on the ball all of his passes were lobbish even the short ones.

What did you think, any different opinions of him after this.

Didn't know if you have watched him much.

L.A. Chieffan
01-09-2009, 12:17 AM
Bradford was overthrowing everybody, TEbow looked like Elway and Montana and Vick and VY put together

beach tribe
01-09-2009, 12:18 AM
One thing I noticed about Bradford tonight was he just lacked zip on the ball all of his passes were lobbish even the short ones.

I believe I saw some zip on a few plays over the mid to deep middle.

He actually killed my thoughts of him not being able to make throws they will ask him to make at the combine or his pro day. He also threw, what looked to me to be a 20-25 yrd out. on a rope...with ease. I've had questions about his arm all yr. The guy can make the throws. No doubt in my mind.

Sam Hall
01-09-2009, 12:21 AM
I believe I saw some zip on a few plays over the mid to deep middle.

He actually killed my thoughts of him not being able to make throws they will ask him to make at the combine or his pro day. He also threw, what looked to me to be a 20-25 yrd out. on a rope...with ease. I've had questions about his arm all yr. The guy can make the throws. No doubt in my mind.

Right, but he isn't consistent enough. The other half of his passes don't have enough zip or float.

Guru
01-09-2009, 12:28 AM
except for the fact that he stared down the WR big timeI've seen the replay of the INT. There is no way you can hang that on the QB in any way, shape, or form. That was in the WRs hands and he didn't hold on. PERIOD.

Molitoth
01-09-2009, 12:29 AM
NOOOOOOO to bradford.

beach tribe
01-09-2009, 12:34 AM
Right, but he isn't consistent enough. The other half of his passes don't have enough zip or float.

Can't say I disagree. I'm only looking at it from a talent/ability standpoint.

DJ's left nut
01-09-2009, 12:40 AM
Does Bradford have a strong feel for the game where he can walk up to the LOS and know where the ball needs to go? No, he's always looking over to the side line. Is the NFL going to put him in the spread 80% of his plays? Maybe if they have Randy Moss and Wes Welker.

Does he have great mechanics?

Brandford has great accuracy. And that is huge. But I don't think that alone is enough to build an NFL career.



Wait, so is there a single spread QB in the game with any football savvy? His system requires he look over to the sideline, that hardly means he doesn't have a feel for the game. And looking over to the sideline is no different than listening to the headseat in the pros. When the play is in motion, he makes quick, accurate decisions. I saw a ton of football savvy in the kid over the course of the season. You're also equating inexperience with inability and that's wholly unfair. Nothing negative has ever been said about the guy when it comes to his aptitude.

And his mechanics are actually pretty sound save the throwing motion. Yet another way he reminds me of Rivers.

okcchief
01-09-2009, 12:44 AM
Originally Posted by cdcox
Does Bradford have a strong feel for the game where he can walk up to the LOS and know where the ball needs to go? No, he's always looking over to the side line. Is the NFL going to put him in the spread 80% of his plays? Maybe if they have Randy Moss and Wes Welker.

Does he have great mechanics?

Brandford has great accuracy. And that is huge. But I don't think that alone is enough to build an NFL career.

He looks over to the sideline because the plays are called from the sideline. They run a no huddle. How many QB's do you see calling their own plays from a no huddle in college? It doesn't mean he can't do it he is just running the system the way the coaching staff wants him too. The kid is smart and manages the offense well. I don't think his football savy is a reason to doubt him at all.

He can also learn to play under center but will need an Oline that can protect him. Most NFL QBs need that though.

They jury is out on all three of these guys no matter how hard your dick is for one of them and how much you doubt another.

ChiefsCountry
01-09-2009, 01:15 AM
Maybe so but Trent was the best QB this franchise ever had.

There is this guy named Len Dawson. Might have heard of him.

kcfanXIII
01-09-2009, 01:23 AM
They jury is out on all three of these guys no matter how hard your dick is for one of them and how much you doubt another.

this is the conclusion i've come to. i'm pretty content to see how the dice roll, and just hope for the best with who ever the chiefs choose to be QBOTF. i'm glad i don't have to make the choice.

DaneMcCloud
01-09-2009, 01:24 AM
Maybe so but Trent was the best QB this franchise ever had.

NEVER go FULL retard

googlegoogle
01-09-2009, 01:24 AM
One thing I noticed about Bradford tonight was he just lacked zip on the ball all of his passes were lobbish even the short ones.

Some of his passes he gets away with in college will get picked in the NFL.

You're not going to see high velocity spirals between defenders like Manning or Cutler can do.

I am no expert though. I want to see how he does in the combines and the postseason games.

Chad Pennington?

dj56dt58
01-09-2009, 06:07 AM
who cares..we're getting Stafford..Sanchez is the worst case scenario

BigMeatballDave
01-09-2009, 06:10 AM
Try educating yourself about how overrated Stafford is and how (until late last season) he was considered a disappointment... considering how highly recruited he was coming out of high school.

Stafford completed barely over 55% of his passes last season and was horrible his freshman year (52% completion %, 7 TDs compared to 13 INTs).

In his two biggest games of the season this year... against Alabama and Florida (the two most NFL-caliber defenses he faced this year) Stafford was average at best (completing just over 57% of his passes) against Alabama and was horrible (under 55% completion %, 0 TD and 3 INTs) against Florida.

Both of those games were also losses.

Stafford is a fraud.Kill yourself, retard. 61.4% as a Jr, you fucking dickwad.

kstater
01-09-2009, 06:11 AM
Have you seen Stafford play? He was a mediocre QB for most of his career (until this year) and runs the most un-NFL like offense of the big 3 (Sanchez, Bradford and Stafford).

:spock:

kepp
01-09-2009, 07:31 AM
I thought his last INT was a perfectly thrown pass. That was on the WR. I heard the one at halftime, I didn't see but I heard it was batted 4-5 times.

I didn't see either of the INTs as his fault...definitely not the second one. That one was squarely on the receiver.

Chiefnj2
01-09-2009, 08:34 AM
Does Bradford have a strong feel for the game where he can walk up to the LOS and know where the ball needs to go? No, he's always looking over to the side line. Is the NFL going to put him in the spread 80% of his plays? Maybe if they have Randy Moss and Wes Welker.

.


Nobody knows. You don't know if he has a strong feel for the game, or if he can call plays himself because the system does not allow him to do it. Is it because he can't handle it, or because the coaches have huge egos and want to maintain control? A combination of both? We don't know.

At the end of the day he has more to learn right now than Sanchez or Stafford. Realistically, even with the ability to call audibles in college, Sanchez isn't likely going to be given the power to do it his first year in the NFL. No coach is going to give a rookie with one year of starting experience the responsibility of calling plays. They are in over their heads as it is.

It's a slow process. That's why when you look back at Ryan, Flacco and Thigpen this past year you see that when asked to throw a lot the guys make mistakes and their stats go down.

jAZ
01-09-2009, 08:49 AM
I didn't expect Bradford to throw the ball so well. I also didn't expect him to be on such a short leash. He's the least NFL ready of the three but has a pretty high ceiling.
I can't tell about the NFL ready, but part of of my opinion is based on what I've heard about how high his ceiling is. Something about Stafford makes me think Blackledge.

Baby Lee
01-09-2009, 08:55 AM
Does Bradford have a strong feel for the game where he can walk up to the LOS and know where the ball needs to go? No, he's always looking over to the side line.
That has to be one of the dumbest critiques I've seen in some time. The coach has installed a system where the offense lines up, then a whole cadre of assistants relay signals from the sidelines regarding adjustments the staff wants based on how the D lines up against them. It's Bradford's JOB under this system to take in all those signals and update the offense. It's what he's SUPPOSED to do. And you spin it like he's some lost child looking to the sideline for his binky.

hawkchief
01-09-2009, 09:06 AM
It's absolutely incredible how many tards get on here and profess they know so much about picking the right guy. The friggin scouts that get paid big bucks to do it miss more than they hit, but somehow a huge number of CP pricks seem to know everything about every QB. Most haven't put a jock on in their lives, but feel qualified to engage everyone in a pissing-contest-to-the-death, regarding their supposed superior knowledge of the intricacies of playing QB in the NFL.

It's one thing to have a gut feel or opinion on the topic, but for so many tools on here that think they are the de-facto experts on a topic like this, all I have to say to you is... rofl and quit showing off your insecurity and foolishness.

Chief Henry
01-09-2009, 09:07 AM
Tebow is my type of player. Fire in his belly with alot of desire. It doesn't appear that he'd have many off the field problems either.

Detroit should pick him. That town is desperate for something to get excited about.

I would not mind seeing Tebow under center in KC. He's gritty and isn't made of glass like Brody Croyle.

I still wanted OU to win...but I was happy for Tebow. I'm also glad he doesn't have that
"THUG" mentality and style.

I still don't know if we need to pick a QB with our 1st pick. If Tebow is available I'd love to get him, but only if its him. I would like to see Thigpen receive another shot.

Skip Towne
01-09-2009, 09:32 AM
That has to be one of the dumbest critiques I've seen in some time. The coach has installed a system where the offense lines up, then a whole cadre of assistants relay signals from the sidelines regarding adjustments the staff wants based on how the D lines up against them. It's Bradford's JOB under this system to take in all those signals and update the offense. It's what he's SUPPOSED to do. And you spin it like he's some lost child looking to the sideline for his binky.

This

beach tribe
01-09-2009, 09:32 AM
Tebow is my type of player. Fire in his belly with alot of desire. It doesn't appear that he'd have many off the field problems either.

Detroit should pick him. That town is desperate for something to get excited about.

I would not mind seeing Tebow under center in KC. He's gritty and isn't made of glass like Brody Croyle.

I still wanted OU to win...but I was happy for Tebow. I'm also glad he doesn't have that
"THUG" mentality and style.

I still don't know if we need to pick a QB with our 1st pick. If Tebow is available I'd love to get him, but only if its him. I would like to see Thigpen receive another shot.

Tebow MIGHT be available with our 1st pick.ROFL

BigChiefFan
01-09-2009, 09:34 AM
Tebow is my type of player. Fire in his belly with alot of desire. It doesn't appear that he'd have many off the field problems either.

Detroit should pick him. That town is desperate for something to get excited about.

I would not mind seeing Tebow under center in KC. He's gritty and isn't made of glass like Brody Croyle.

I still wanted OU to win...but I was happy for Tebow. I'm also glad he doesn't have that
"THUG" mentality and style.

I still don't know if we need to pick a QB with our 1st pick. If Tebow is available I'd love to get him, but only if its him. I would like to see Thigpen receive another shot.Tebow isn't a QB at the NFL level, sorry to burst your bubble.

banyon
01-09-2009, 09:39 AM
Tebow is my type of player. Fire in his belly with alot of desire. It doesn't appear that he'd have many off the field problems either.

Detroit should pick him. That town is desperate for something to get excited about.

I would not mind seeing Tebow under center in KC. He's gritty and isn't made of glass like Brody Croyle.

I still wanted OU to win...but I was happy for Tebow. I'm also glad he doesn't have that
"THUG" mentality and style.

I still don't know if we need to pick a QB with our 1st pick. If Tebow is available I'd love to get him, but only if its him. I would like to see Thigpen receive another shot.

ROFL

sparkky
01-09-2009, 09:49 AM
I haven't seen a lot of college games this year but based upon just the bowl games, this is what I came away with.

Tebow, the best athlete. also the most intangibles and "it" factor.
Sanchez, the best quarterback in a traditional sense.
Stafford, the streakiest. when he's hot he's hot, when he's not, he's average.
Bradford, well he just didn't show me much. I was expecting a better showing. especially with the talent around him.

until the combine, I hate to say it, I'm leaning towards Tebow as my favorite.

BigChiefFan
01-09-2009, 09:52 AM
I haven't seen a lot of college games this year but based upon just the bowl games, this is what I came away with.

Tebow, the best athlete. also the most intangibles and "it" factor.
Sanchez, the best quarterback in a traditional sense.
Stafford, the streakiest. when he's hot he's hot, when he's not, he's average.
Bradford, well he just didn't show me much. I was expecting a better showing. especially with the talent around him.

until the combine, I hate to say it, I'm leaning towards Tebow as my favorite.
Don't quit your day job.:D

jspchief
01-09-2009, 09:54 AM
Some NFL front office is likely going to take "Bustford" in the top 5. If only they knew what Chiefsplanet knows.

Personally, I don't think any of the 3 are overly exciting prospects as top 10 QB picks. There are legitimate question marks about everyone of them, and I feel like the closest thing to a "standout" among them is Sanchez.

cdcox
01-09-2009, 09:56 AM
That has to be one of the dumbest critiques I've seen in some time. The coach has installed a system where the offense lines up, then a whole cadre of assistants relay signals from the sidelines regarding adjustments the staff wants based on how the D lines up against them. It's Bradford's JOB under this system to take in all those signals and update the offense. It's what he's SUPPOSED to do. And you spin it like he's some lost child looking to the sideline for his binky.

NFL QB need to be able to get a good pre-snap read on a defense. It is one of the things you look for in a college prospect. He essentially has zero training in that. He's 4 years behind the prospects who have that experience. And even with 4 years experience doing pre-snap reads in college, rookies are going to be pretty rough.

Chieftain58
01-09-2009, 09:57 AM
I have never seen either of them play until last night and Tebow looked amazing and Bradford looked lost. Tebow looks bigger and stronger and has one hell of an attitude, If we could get him it would be a big upgrade.

Mr. Laz
01-09-2009, 09:57 AM
TIM TEBOW!!!!!!
die


no ....... die, preferably in a fire


no wait ........ die, preferably in a fire while drinking antifreeze

jspchief
01-09-2009, 09:59 AM
Please stop with the Tebow stuff. The guy is a god in college football, but what he does in college at QB does not translate to the NFL.

Brock
01-09-2009, 09:59 AM
NFL QB need to be able to get a good pre-snap read on a defense. It is one of the things you look for in a college prospect. He essentially has zero training in that. He's 4 years behind the prospects who have that experience. And even with 4 years experience doing pre-snap reads in college, rookies are going to be pretty rough.

It appears that Sanchez and Stafford would be far ahead of these spread guys in that regard.

Baby Lee
01-09-2009, 10:00 AM
NFL QB need to be able to get a good pre-snap read on a defense. It is one of the things you look for in a college prospect. He essentially has zero training in that. He's 4 years behind the prospects who have that experience. And even with 4 years experience doing pre-snap reads in college, rookies are going to be pretty rough.

It might be a question about him imposed by the system, but it's not a failure of his making.

CaliforniaChief
01-09-2009, 10:02 AM
Maybe we can get a really good QB like Mark Sanchez in the 2nd, pick up another draft pick in an LJ trade and get a playmaker like Orakpo, Curry, Maulauga, or Crabtree with our first round pick. Bring in Rich Gannon as a QB coach and let him tutor Thigpen, bring in another FA QB but don't use the highest pick we've had on a position we already have potential in. Sorry if this is a duplicate opinion...i'm new here and am still figuring this out.

Chiefnj2
01-09-2009, 10:02 AM
I can't believe people are saying they weren't impressed at all by Bradford last night. I understand he operates primarily out of the shotgun and his program requires him to get the calls from the sidelines. We don't know if he is capable or able to make reads and adjustments on his own. But aside from that, the kid threw a nice ball and was very accurate. His deep balls were on the money.

Brock
01-09-2009, 10:03 AM
I can't believe people are saying they weren't impressed at all by Bradford last night. I understand he operates primarily out of the shotgun and his program requires him to get the calls from the sidelines. We don't know if he is capable or able to make reads and adjustments on his own. But aside from that, the kid threw a nice ball and was very accurate. His deep balls were on the money.

Yep. I've been thinking for a while now that he's very underrated around here.

jspchief
01-09-2009, 10:08 AM
I can't believe people are saying they weren't impressed at all by Bradford last night. I understand he operates primarily out of the shotgun and his program requires him to get the calls from the sidelines. We don't know if he is capable or able to make reads and adjustments on his own. But aside from that, the kid threw a nice ball and was very accurate. His deep balls were on the money.It's a by-product of the need to support another choice at QB. If I like player X, then player Y and Z suck by default.

El Jefe
01-09-2009, 10:11 AM
Yep. I've been thinking for a while now that he's very underrated around here.

Yep, I got blasted one time when I said I would be happy if he was a Chief. I think he is going to be a good QB, the kid is very accurate.

BigChiefFan
01-09-2009, 10:18 AM
I can't believe people are saying they weren't impressed at all by Bradford last night. I understand he operates primarily out of the shotgun and his program requires him to get the calls from the sidelines. We don't know if he is capable or able to make reads and adjustments on his own. But aside from that, the kid threw a nice ball and was very accurate. His deep balls were on the money.Some only see what THEY WANT TO SEE. Bradford looked great. The loss wasn't on him, the fictitious, bogus argument about him having all the weapons, proved last night, that some are biased and have been using a BOGUS argument against Bradford. Some of us have been saying it for months, but the deaf, dumb, and blind kids on this board, sure play a mean pinball and they've got the masses fooled into thinking Bradford doesn't measure up. It's quit humorous, actually.

kepp
01-09-2009, 10:19 AM
I can't believe people are saying they weren't impressed at all by Bradford last night. I understand he operates primarily out of the shotgun and his program requires him to get the calls from the sidelines. We don't know if he is capable or able to make reads and adjustments on his own. But aside from that, the kid threw a nice ball and was very accurate. His deep balls were on the money.

Agreed. Last night's game raised my opinion of him. His two INTs, IMO, were not his fault at all and most of his throws were dead-on. I'd still want Stafford or Sanchez before him, but I wouldn't complain about Bradford.

beach tribe
01-09-2009, 10:21 AM
"YAAAY! Tebow!! We want Tebow!!!"
:spock: Are you serious?

King_Chief_Fan
01-09-2009, 10:22 AM
Some only see what THEY WANT TO SEE. Bradford looked great. The loss wasn't on him, the fictitious, bogus argument about him having all the weapons, proved last night, that some are biased and have been using a BOGUS argument against Bradford. Some of us have been saying it for months, but the deaf, dumb, and blind kids on this board, sure play a mean pinball and they've got the masses fooled into thinking Bradford doesn't measure up. It's quit humorous, actually.

Bradford needs to stay in school.

Reerun_KC
01-09-2009, 10:23 AM
Some only see what THEY WANT TO SEE. Bradford looked great. The loss wasn't on him, the fictitious, bogus argument about him having all the weapons, proved last night, that some are biased and have been using a BOGUS argument against Bradford. Some of us have been saying it for months, but the deaf, dumb, and blind kids on this board, sure play a mean pinball and they've got the masses fooled into thinking Bradford doesn't measure up. It's quit humorous, actually.

one could say the same thing about you. YOUR only seeing what you want to see.... And your arguement is Bogus...

Mr. Laz
01-09-2009, 10:23 AM
last night Bradford was let down by his receivers. He stood in there and delivered the ball even though he knew he was about to get clocked.

that said, i still think Stafford has better NFL potential



Bradford's delivery is weird

his hand is sort "under" the ball like his hand is too small

delivery is a bit slow

it's sort of sidearm and reminds of ty detmer for some reason


i think it will be a problem in the NFL

penguinz
01-09-2009, 10:23 AM
"YAAAY! Tebow!! We want Tebow!!!"
:spock: Are you serious?In the right situation I think Tebow will be a productive QB in the NFL.

Reerun_KC
01-09-2009, 10:24 AM
Bradford needs to stay in school.


This....

Even the Gameday Crew said whomever drafts Bradford will have to be patient, Bradford is going to have a HUGE learning curve, going from a spread, look to the sideline for his binky, to learning how to read a defense and call audibles...

King_Chief_Fan
01-09-2009, 10:25 AM
It might be a question about him imposed by the system, but it's not a failure of his making.

agree... but he will not hit the ground running in the NFL. A team that chooses him will have to be patient and develop him. I think he will be successful but not right away.

The Chiefs have always sucked at developing a QB.

Mr. Laz
01-09-2009, 10:26 AM
btw ...... Bradford won't stay in school and probably shouldn't

apparently he's gonna lose his entire offensive line and next year the sooners quarterback is gonna get raped.

Bradford will be a top 10 pick so he should bolt while the bolting is good.

Chiefnj2
01-09-2009, 10:27 AM
agree... but he will not hit the ground running in the NFL. A team that chooses him will have to be patient and develop him. I think he will be successful but not right away.

The Chiefs have always sucked at developing a QB.

Which is part of the reason he should go back to school. The only QB who has a chance to play from the get go, IMO, is Stafford because he's played a few years.

King_Chief_Fan
01-09-2009, 10:28 AM
Which is part of the reason he should go back to school. The only QB who has a chance to play from the get go, IMO, is Stafford because he's played a few years.
yup

BigChiefFan
01-09-2009, 10:30 AM
one could say the same thing about you. YOUR only seeing what you want to see.... And your arguement is Bogus...
No. I see an accurate as Hell QB. The MOST ACCURATE in all of college football and the FACTS, support that. I also like Stafford and Sanchez, and have said so many times on this board. I'm wondering what I stated that makes you think what I said was bogus.

jspchief
01-09-2009, 10:31 AM
In the right situation I think Tebow will be a productive QB in the NFL.In the right situation, Tebow might someday be a productive QB in the NFL.

If my team already had their franchise QB, and had the draft pick to burn, I'd love to have Tebow as my 2nd string QB. Give him a few years to develop QBing skills, and in the meantime you have a guy that can come in on select packages, and would be a nightmare for defenses in the short term role of spelling your injured starting QB.

The guy has everything that makes a pro athlete. That being said, he's nowhere close to being a pro QB.

DJ's left nut
01-09-2009, 10:32 AM
btw ...... Bradford won't stay in school and probably shouldn't

apparently he's gonna lose his entire offensive line and next year the sooners quarterback is gonna get raped.


Don't you know that's the mark of a good pro quarterback.

The ability to get gangraped and make mediocre throws is what separates the true prospects from guys that need 3 seconds to make perfect throws (mere system QBs of course).

Bradford should stay, so he can show all the scouts that he knows how to make off balanced throws while running for his life, that's what you need in an NFL QB these days.

Brock
01-09-2009, 10:34 AM
In the right situation, Tebow might someday be a productive QB in the NFL.

If my team already had their franchise QB, and had the draft pick to burn, I'd love to have Tebow as my 2nd string QB. Give him a few years to develop QBing skills, and in the meantime you have a guy that can come in on select packages, and would be a nightmare for defenses in the short term role of spelling your injured starting QB.

The guy has everything that makes a pro athlete. That being said, he's nowhere close to being a pro QB.

Agree 100 percent, just no way he should be drafted highly.

jspchief
01-09-2009, 10:34 AM
Which is part of the reason he should go back to school. The only QB who has a chance to play from the get go, IMO, is Stafford because he's played a few years.But almost all of the "cons" for Bradford aren't going to be dispelled with another year at Oklahoma.

DJ's left nut
01-09-2009, 10:34 AM
In the right situation, Tebow might someday be a productive QB in the NFL.

If my team already had their franchise QB, and had the draft pick to burn, I'd love to have Tebow as my 2nd string QB. Give him a few years to develop QBing skills, and in the meantime you have a guy that can come in on select packages, and would be a nightmare for defenses in the short term role of spelling your injured starting QB.

The guy has everything that makes a pro athlete. That being said, he's nowhere close to being a pro QB.

If Tebow's around in the 3rd I take him without thinking twice. He's a guy that will absolutely contribute somehow in the NFL.

However, he won't be there in the 3rd. If he gets those kinds of readings from the draft reports, he'll just return to CFB, he's a mortal lock for the Heisman next season if he does.

Baby Lee
01-09-2009, 10:38 AM
This....

Even the Gameday Crew said whomever drafts Bradford will have to be patient, Bradford is going to have a HUGE learning curve, going from a spread, look to the sideline for his binky, to learning how to read a defense and call audibles...

Rerun, standing on the shoulders of mental midgets to delve new depths of stupidity.

Chiefnj2
01-09-2009, 10:43 AM
But almost all of the "cons" for Bradford aren't going to be dispelled with another year at Oklahoma.

Playing from a spread probably won't change, but other things may. Losing the left side of his line will probably mean he will face more pressure and have to throw the ball under more durress and quicker. Maybe he gets some power to audible every so often and run a real hurry up offense.

Not many teams in the NFL have the luxary of grabbing a QB in the top 5 and waiting at least a year before the guy gets some playing time and then slowly develop him.

El Jefe
01-09-2009, 10:44 AM
Which is part of the reason he should go back to school. The only QB who has a chance to play from the get go, IMO, is Stafford because he's played a few years.

Some people said the same thing about Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco. A point can be made for both thoughts. I personally like Bradford, I'm not in love with him, but wouldn't be sad if he played for the Chiefs.

smittysbar
01-09-2009, 10:48 AM
I just hope all three come out

Chiefnj2
01-09-2009, 10:55 AM
Some people said the same thing about Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco. A point can be made for both thoughts. I personally like Bradford, I'm not in love with him, but wouldn't be sad if he played for the Chiefs.

Ryan and Flacco both stayed their senior years. They had a lot of starts.

I honestly don't know the answer to this question but how many successful NFL QB's started only one year and came out early (Sanchez)? Bradford has two years starting experience but is on a really short leash.

It would be a miracle for them to come out and be able to play their first year.

patteeu
01-09-2009, 11:01 AM
Please stop with the Tebow stuff. The guy is a god in college football, but what he does in college at QB does not translate to the NFL.

Draft Tebow in the 2nd round. Sign Vick out of Leavenworth (or wherever he is now). Line up those two and Thigpen in the backfield on every play and let the defenses guess which one is going to take the snap and we're golden!

Yes, it's a joke.

patteeu
01-09-2009, 11:06 AM
Which is part of the reason he should go back to school. The only QB who has a chance to play from the get go, IMO, is Stafford because he's played a few years.

btw ...... Bradford won't stay in school and probably shouldn't

apparently he's gonna lose his entire offensive line and next year the sooners quarterback is gonna get raped.

Bradford will be a top 10 pick so he should bolt while the bolting is good.

Laz makes a lot more sense to me. Why should Bradford care whether he's going to play from the get go or not? The only reason that would matter is if it's going to cause him to be drafted significantly lower than he could with one more year of seasoning at the college level. If he's going in the top 10 now, there's no good reason to wait. Look what happened to Matt Leinart. He left millions of dollars on the table by staying in school and if he'd have had a severe injury that last year it could have been much more.

Chiefnj2
01-09-2009, 11:10 AM
Laz makes a lot more sense to me. Why should Bradford care whether he's going to play from the get go or not? The only reason that would matter is if it's going to cause him to be drafted significantly lower than he could with one more year of seasoning at the college level. If he's going in the top 10 now, there's no good reason to wait. Look what happened to Matt Leinart. He left millions of dollars on the table by staying in school and if he'd have had a severe injury that last year it could have been much more.

I guess the question is, is he really going to go in the top 10? Assume you are KC and/or Detroit. Bradford comes in for a workout and displays poor foot skills because he's taken 90% of his drops from shotgun and needs a lot of work on reading defenses, adjusting, etc. You know it is very likely that he won't step on the field for 1 1/2 years. Are you going to spend that draft pick and all that money on him?

patteeu
01-09-2009, 11:16 AM
I guess the question is, is he really going to go in the top 10? Assume you are KC and/or Detroit. Bradford comes in for a workout and displays poor foot skills because he's taken 90% of his drops from shotgun and needs a lot of work on reading defenses, adjusting, etc. You know it is very likely that he won't step on the field for 1 1/2 years. Are you going to spend that draft pick and all that money on him?

I agree that that's the question.

BigMeatballDave
01-09-2009, 11:31 AM
In the right situation, Tebow might someday be a productive QB in the NFL.

If my team already had their franchise QB, and had the draft pick to burn, I'd love to have Tebow as my 2nd string QB. Give him a few years to develop QBing skills, and in the meantime you have a guy that can come in on select packages, and would be a nightmare for defenses in the short term role of spelling your injured starting QB.

The guy has everything that makes a pro athlete. That being said, he's nowhere close to being a pro QB.This. I'm not a fan of Tebow, to be sure. But, I'd be cool with this.

duncan_idaho
01-09-2009, 11:37 AM
Things I like about Bradford:

1) Accuracy. When given time to throw, he is going to deliver the ball, and deliver it where his receivers can catch it easily. When rushed, he still puts the ball where his receiver has the best chance to get it.

2) Touch. Bradford can drop second-level throws into extremely tight windows. Best example of this was a throw last night where he fit about a 12-yard out into a postage-stamp sized area between a dropping LB and the corner for a completion. That's a throw a lot of NFL quarterbacks don't have in their arsenal... and I have seen Bradford do it consistently over the past few years.

3) Athleticism. Bradford is a good athlete with quick feet and runs very well. He has the speed to be an effective bootleg QB.

4) Footwork. Because of those quick feet, Bradford does a great job of using proper footwork, planting and throwing, and he's able to exhibit proper footwork in situations most QBs can't. This is one of the reasons he's so accurate, both when he has time and when is rolling out or on the move.

Things to knock:

1) Bradford hasn't had to do a bunch of checking down himself. All indications are that he is a bright kid, but it will take some time for him to get used to doing this himself.

2) His arm strength- while better than some give it credit for - is not elite. It's likely to improve some as he gets older and a little thicker (he's carrying what, 205 pounds on a 6-4 frame?), but it never is going to be jaw-dropping.

DaneMcCloud
01-09-2009, 11:39 AM
Tebow is my type of player. Fire in his belly with alot of desire. It doesn't appear that he'd have many off the field problems either.

Detroit should pick him. That town is desperate for something to get excited about.

I would not mind seeing Tebow under center in KC. He's gritty and isn't made of glass like Brody Croyle.

I still wanted OU to win...but I was happy for Tebow. I'm also glad he doesn't have that
"THUG" mentality and style.

I still don't know if we need to pick a QB with our 1st pick. If Tebow is available I'd love to get him, but only if its him. I would like to see Thigpen receive another shot.

Well, it's comforting to read that you don't know jackshit about football, either.

DaneMcCloud
01-09-2009, 11:42 AM
Maybe we can get a really good QB like Mark Sanchez in the 2nd, pick up another draft pick in an LJ trade and get a playmaker like Orakpo, Curry, Maulauga, or Crabtree with our first round pick. Bring in Rich Gannon as a QB coach and let him tutor Thigpen, bring in another FA QB but don't use the highest pick we've had on a position we already have potential in. Sorry if this is a duplicate opinion...i'm new here and am still figuring this out.

Dude.

NO team is going to trade a 1st round pick for a near 30 year-old RB, let alone a RB with a history of off the field altercations (and one still pending).

Secondly, if Sanchez were to find out via scouts and advisers that he'd last into the 2nd round (which would NEVER happen anyway), he'd stay another year at USC.

Third, Rich Gannon (or any other multi-millionaire former NFL player) is NEVER going to put in 80 hours a week to earn 200k per year. Especially someone like Rich Gannon, who makes somewhere around $2 million per year broadcasting NFL games for CBS.

duncan_idaho
01-09-2009, 11:56 AM
I personally find Tebow's act tiresome. He's pretty cheesy, and his "promises" at the press conference following the Ole Miss loss were so overplayed I wanted to shoot myself (which was made worse by how cheesy and "motivational" they were).

I think his act works OK in college football, but I don't think that's the type of guy who inspires professional football players. At least not at QB. At MLB, maybe, but I have a hard time believing pro football players would take a guy who is that much of a boy scout seriously.

"Golly jeepers, guys, this is just like the time I was spoon-feeding orphans with leprousy in Namibia... we just have to dig down and do what they would do!"

'you mean, do whatever it takes to find food, Timmy?'

Chief Henry
01-09-2009, 11:58 AM
Well, it's comforting to read that you don't know jackshit about football, either.

Its refreshing to know that your level of expertise on this is about the size
of my turd I dumped abut 20 minutes ago. With that said, Tebow is a winner and winners are in short supply in KC.

Have a nice day.

BigChiefFan
01-09-2009, 12:06 PM
I personally find Tebow's act tiresome. He's pretty cheesy, and his "promises" at the press conference following the Ole Miss loss were so overplayed I wanted to shoot myself (which was made worse by how cheesy and "motivational" they were).

I think his act works OK in college football, but I don't think that's the type of guy who inspires professional football players. At least not at QB. At MLB, maybe, but I have a hard time believing pro football players would take a guy who is that much of a boy scout seriously.

"Golly jeepers, guys, this is just like the time I was spoon-feeding orphans with leprousy in Namibia... we just have to dig down and do what they would do!"

'you mean, do whatever it takes to find food, Timmy?'The Mike Sweeney of football.

duncan_idaho
01-09-2009, 12:13 PM
The Mike Sweeney of football.

Good comparison.

"COme on guys, get up! We just gotta play hard and TRY! Praise Jesus!"

jidar
01-09-2009, 12:19 PM
I've been more leaning towards Stafford for awhile now, but watching Bradford last night made me question myself. I saw a kid with great accuracy making strong throws, I saw him making throws with great touch, and I saw him stand in there and deliver a throw before taking a big hit. There are questions due to the system he is, but he's got real potential and I think anyone can see that. He looks more accurate than Stafford, that's for sure.

Also, KC is in a pretty good position to take Bradford if he needs development. We're still rebuilding and we have a QB who can get us by in the short term right now.

jidar
01-09-2009, 12:21 PM
also, you Tebow people are in fantasy land. That kid is a great college QB, but no way that playstyle works in the NFL, just no way.

And if you try to point to Tebows stats I've got two words for you: Chris Leak

DJ's left nut
01-09-2009, 12:23 PM
I guess the question is, is he really going to go in the top 10? Assume you are KC and/or Detroit. Bradford comes in for a workout and displays poor foot skills because he's taken 90% of his drops from shotgun and needs a lot of work on reading defenses, adjusting, etc. You know it is very likely that he won't step on the field for 1 1/2 years. Are you going to spend that draft pick and all that money on him?

Is SF drafting 9?

If Stafford and Sanchez go 1/2, I'd absolutely consider dropping back to 8 for an extra 2nd. He's not going before then. If only Stafford or Sanchez goes before us, I'd be doubly inclined to drop down as we're almost 100% assured of getting one of the 2 remaining players.

If we can't find a partner, I'd still take him at 3. He's going to be a good one.

These aren't infants, fellas. This "he'd have to learn to drop back" thing is just bizarre. You really think a kid with the ability he has shown is going to struggle to drop back? We're not talking about a peewee leaguer here, we're talking about a Heisman winner with an elite pedigree. I think he'll manage.

Additionally, even with their respective offenses, it's not as though Stafford or Sanchez are going to be ready to give you veteran reads when they step on the field either. They'll be facing some pretty steep learning curves themselves. They'll be a little bit ahead, but if Bradford has the aptitude scouts are saying he does, he'll get there soon enough.

When he gets there, I'll take the accurate arm over the big one every time. Additionally, despite his arm being a little weaker, he throws the best deep ball of the three. It's that nice high arch that lets recievers run under it. Reminds me of Jeff Blake (who couldn't do a damn thing but throw deep passes).

dj56dt58
01-09-2009, 12:55 PM
Draft Tebow in the 2nd round. Sign Vick out of Leavenworth (or wherever he is now). Line up those two and Thigpen in the backfield on every play and let the defenses guess which one is going to take the snap and we're golden!


http://www.kcchiefs.com/media/staff/herman_edwards.jpg

DJ's left nut
01-09-2009, 01:16 PM
Looks like someone just goosed his nuts.

Chiefnj2
01-09-2009, 01:25 PM
Is SF drafting 9?

If Stafford and Sanchez go 1/2, I'd absolutely consider dropping back to 8 for an extra 2nd. He's not going before then. If only Stafford or Sanchez goes before us, I'd be doubly inclined to drop down as we're almost 100% assured of getting one of the 2 remaining players.

If we can't find a partner, I'd still take him at 3. He's going to be a good one.

These aren't infants, fellas. This "he'd have to learn to drop back" thing is just bizarre. You really think a kid with the ability he has shown is going to struggle to drop back? We're not talking about a peewee leaguer here, we're talking about a Heisman winner with an elite pedigree. I think he'll manage.

Additionally, even with their respective offenses, it's not as though Stafford or Sanchez are going to be ready to give you veteran reads when they step on the field either. They'll be facing some pretty steep learning curves themselves. They'll be a little bit ahead, but if Bradford has the aptitude scouts are saying he does, he'll get there soon enough.

When he gets there, I'll take the accurate arm over the big one every time. Additionally, despite his arm being a little weaker, he throws the best deep ball of the three. It's that nice high arch that lets recievers run under it. Reminds me of Jeff Blake (who couldn't do a damn thing but throw deep passes).

I agree that he throws the best deep ball, but I don't necessarily agree that converting a spread QB to a pro style is as easily said than done. There have been a lot of spread college QB's with good completion %'s who never developed.

Darth CarlSatan
01-09-2009, 01:38 PM
I don't think he's coming out, but he's my choice in the QB dice-roll.

Tebow

Reesing

Chase McDanielson

TIM TEBOW!!!!!!

NONE of the above.

Sounds like Bradford at Oklahoma, except Bustford also is the product of the spread offense on top of that.

Love it! Call it canon, and slap that bitch RIGHT in to the CP Lexicon!
REP!

Gravedigger
01-09-2009, 01:52 PM
Either Detriot will take Bradford for his Manningesque type of pocket passer abilities and his crazy college numbers, or they'll take Stafford for his big arm and upside pro style. Either way we'll get one of the two and I'm not too worried because I see great things in both of them, my personal pick is Stafford though. I'm not a mindless drone who just goes off one game, especially a game that happens almost a month after the regular college season ends to judge Bradford. I think they'll both be good quarterbacks but in my personal opinion I want the big arm cool under pressure comeback play of Matt Stafford cause our Oline even after FA and the draft won't be what Bradford had in Oklahoma.

Detoxing
01-09-2009, 02:02 PM
I want the big arm cool under pressure comeback play of Matt Stafford cause our Oline even after FA and the draft won't be what Bradford had in Oklahoma.

You mean he won't have the kind of time he had in OU, right? Because even though our O line isn't great, it's still an NFL O-Line

crazycoffey
01-09-2009, 02:05 PM
agree... but he will not hit the ground running in the NFL. A team that chooses him will have to be patient and develop him. I think he will be successful but not right away.

The Chiefs have always sucked at developing a QB.


I don't see how any QB is going to "hit the ground running" in the NFL. It's a different game, different speed and surrounded by more talent on both sides of the ball on game day than any QB is used to, I don't care what kind of college offense they run.

"NFL" style of offense - WTF does that mean? a good 75% of your team will never be on an NFL roster the other 25% may not be on one for more than a couple years, and somehow Stafford is ready to start and need little to no grooming? He's that much more prepared? I call BS.

The learning curve starts over in the NFL, all the stats, scores, records are reset. He who has talent, heart, desire, and the will to learn and win will prevail. And I see why Stafford is high on the leader board, but to be disappointed if we end up with Bradford is stupid....

Brock
01-09-2009, 02:10 PM
I don't see how any QB is going to "hit the ground running" in the NFL.

Matt Ryan.

beach tribe
01-09-2009, 02:12 PM
I don't see how our past development of QBs is relevant with a completely new regime.

kstater
01-09-2009, 02:13 PM
Either Detriot will take Bradford for his Manningesque type of pocket passer abilities and his crazy college numbers, or they'll take Stafford for his big arm and upside pro style. Either way we'll get one of the two and I'm not too worried because I see great things in both of them, my personal pick is Stafford though. I'm not a mindless drone who just goes off one game, especially a game that happens almost a month after the regular college season ends to judge Bradford. I think they'll both be good quarterbacks but in my personal opinion I want the big arm cool under pressure comeback play of Matt Stafford cause our Oline even after FA and the draft won't be what Bradford had in Oklahoma.

You did not just compare Bradford to Manning.

crazycoffey
01-09-2009, 02:19 PM
Matt Ryan.


oh, but he was (and is) in a spread system, that doesn't count [/hamas, mecca, you]

Brock
01-09-2009, 02:19 PM
oh, but he was (and is) in a spread system, that doesn't count [/hamas, mecca, you]

He wasn't, and isn't, and I wanted to draft Ryan last year.

duncan_idaho
01-09-2009, 02:20 PM
Either Detriot will take Bradford for his Manningesque type of pocket passer abilities and his crazy college numbers, or they'll take Stafford for his big arm and upside pro style. Either way we'll get one of the two and I'm not too worried because I see great things in both of them, my personal pick is Stafford though. I'm not a mindless drone who just goes off one game, especially a game that happens almost a month after the regular college season ends to judge Bradford. I think they'll both be good quarterbacks but in my personal opinion I want the big arm cool under pressure comeback play of Matt Stafford cause our Oline even after FA and the draft won't be what Bradford had in Oklahoma.

Not exactly words I would use to describe Matthew Stafford, but you realize this is probably what a TON of Chargers fans were saying after the 98 draft, right?

crazycoffey
01-09-2009, 02:24 PM
He wasn't, and isn't, and I wanted to draft Ryan last year.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/Falcons_on_offense_at_Atlanta_at_Oakland_11-2-08_12.JPG/180px-Falcons_on_offense_at_Atlanta_at_Oakland_11-2-08_12.JPG

sorry, I guess I was seeing things when he was/is always in the shotgun formation.

I liked him too, glad you wanted him, so what. Doesn't devalue my point. he went through an offseason program before his first start, correct? He is now proving that he can do it in the NFL, at least so far. Also - good for him.

Now, what was it exactly that proved he could do that when he was in college? Are those "rules" conclusive for ALL College QB's? How do the ryan leafs and tom bradys fall into that evaluation?

Brock
01-09-2009, 02:29 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/Falcons_on_offense_at_Atlanta_at_Oakland_11-2-08_12.JPG/180px-Falcons_on_offense_at_Atlanta_at_Oakland_11-2-08_12.JPG

sorry, I guess I was seeing things when he was/is always in the shotgun formation.

I liked him too, glad you wanted him, so what. Doesn't devalue my point. he went through an offseason program before his first start, correct? He is now proving that he can do it in the NFL, at least so far. Also - good for him.

Now, what was it exactly that proved he could do that when he was in college? Are those "rules" conclusive for ALL College QB's? How do the ryan leafs and tom bradys fall into that evaluation?


Atlanta runs a prostyle offense most of the time, and Ryan didn't run the spread offense at BC. A picture of Ryan in the shotgun formation doesn't mean what you think it means. Your point was that "I don't see how any QB is going to "hit the ground running" in the NFL.", which is bunk, and Ryan proves that it's bunk.

crazycoffey
01-09-2009, 02:36 PM
Atlanta runs a prostyle offense most of the time, and Ryan didn't run the spread offense at BC. A picture of Ryan in the shotgun formation doesn't mean what you think it means. Your point was that "I don't see how any QB is going to "hit the ground running" in the NFL.", which is bunk, and Ryan proves that it's bunk.


You got a hard on for me don't you?

My point is that he went through an offseason too, preseason, got to get started on his new NFL learning curve, he made adjustments and learned, right?

Why is only Stafford the one that can do that next year? I don't understand how this arguement has legs and keeps resurfacing at every point of discussion about any other QB not named Stafford. And it's got to the point where now my baises for stafford are getting mauled.....

Brock
01-09-2009, 02:41 PM
You got a hard on for me don't you?

My point is that he went through an offseason too, preseason, got to get started on his new NFL learning curve, he made adjustments and learned, right?

Why is only Stafford the one that can do that next year? I don't understand how this arguement has legs and keeps resurfacing at every point of discussion about any other QB not named Stafford. And it's got to the point where now my baises for stafford are getting mauled.....

I didn't mention Stafford, so I don't really know why you're bringing him up.

crazycoffey
01-09-2009, 02:43 PM
I didn't mention Stafford, so I don't really know why you're bringing him up.


that was the point of my comparisions that you first responded too, hence the reason I say you just have a hard on for me. doesn't matter that in this thread, we both have said Bradford is underrated on this board and he even impressed us last night. You still had to try and find a way to argue with me.

whatever.

Darth CarlSatan
01-09-2009, 02:49 PM
Tight Endbow all the way homie. Single threat FTW

FYP.

It's kinda "all or nothing" here. We deal in extremes.

My personal wish list is...

Sanchez
Stafford
Bradford

But to be honest, I'd be excited about any of those 3. It's about time the Chiefs went "balls out" and went after a franchise QB.

I can't say Bradford is going to be a bust, but if I'm a GM, I'm not making a $60M investment in a kid that is going to have to be taught how to take snaps from center, learn 3, 5 and 7 step drops and actually read a defense, pre and post snap.

Sanchez
Stafford





Bradford

Your enter key must have broke after the sixth time you hit it after Stafford.

I'm one of the few people that refuse to make that ridiculous comment that he doesn't make NFL-caliber throws. He does, but he's not required to nearly as often as Sanchez and Stafford.

He's obviously a talented college QB, but he has more going against him in regards to becoming a NFL QB compared to the other two.

Playing in a pro style offense is a HUGE advantage for Stafford and Sanchez.

Does Bradford have potential?

Absolutely.

But is that potential worth a $60M investment and a top draft pick, knowing that he has a hill to climb right out of the box, learning how to take snaps, use proper footwork on drops, and read defenses pre/post snap?

Bradford has potential, I'm just not sure it's going to be realized early enough to make him worth that large of a financial investment.

Even Herbstreit and Corso said he's going to have a large learning curve if he does declare.

If you're talking about the NFL, Tebow is irrelevant. If you're talking about tonight's game, he deserved all the praise.

One thing I noticed about Bradford tonight was he just lacked zip on the ball all of his passes were lobbish even the short ones.

NOOOOOOO to bradford.


Bud Light presents, Real Men of Genius(NON-sarcastic version):
"Real men of geeeeeniuuuus".....

"Mr. Football Fan who act-ually has-a clue"...

"It's a hard road you travel my friend, but you never travel alone".

"Always got the backup"...

"Spending your valuable time in the pursuit of educating some douche-nozzle who when faced with facts, clings to their homerism link a barnacle on the S.S. Minnow".

"Get out-ta here you douchebaaag"...

"So grab a bottle of Bud Light, crack it over the skull of that useless fuck stick, and pour yourself a Black and Tan".

"Hey, that's not our produuuct"...

"Come here Michael Bolton, I've got one for you too"

"Tiiiime to hit the highwa-AARGH! OH! OUCH! OI!"

Chiefnj2
01-09-2009, 02:51 PM
You got a hard on for me don't you?

My point is that he went through an offseason too, preseason, got to get started on his new NFL learning curve, he made adjustments and learned, right?

Why is only Stafford the one that can do that next year? I don't understand how this arguement has legs and keeps resurfacing at every point of discussion about any other QB not named Stafford. And it's got to the point where now my baises for stafford are getting mauled.....

Stafford is likely the only one to be able to do it next year because he has started for 3 years in a pro style sytem. That gives him a short term advantage over Bradford (2 years starter in a spread on a short leash) and Sanchez (1 year starter in a pro system).

There is a lot of data that NFL QB success dramatically increases when the player has 30-35+ starts in college (I forget the exact number), but I'm sure you can search for it.

Brock
01-09-2009, 02:51 PM
that was the point of my comparisions that you first responded too, hence the reason I say you just have a hard on for me. doesn't matter that in this thread, we both have said Bradford is underrated on this board and he even impressed us last night. You still had to try and find a way to argue with me.

whatever.

Whatever, indeed. That was my exact thought when you inaccurately included me in your tag about hamas and mecca.

milkman
01-10-2009, 09:22 AM
Finally read through this thread, and I have a couple of points.

I see that people are saying that the two ints that Bradford threw weren't his fault, and I would disagree.

The first pick was a bad decision, for two reasons.

He threw that ball into a crowd, and bad things often happen when a QB does that.

He also threw that ball short of the goal line in a situation that demanded he get that ball into the end zone.

The second pick, while not a bad throw, was a little high and it gave the DB the opportunity to make a play on the ball.

That being said, this was the first game that Bradford really faced consistent pressure, and while he did make a couple of questionable decisions, overall, I thought he showed a lot of things to build on.

smittysbar
01-10-2009, 10:22 AM
Finally read through this thread, and I have a couple of points.

I see that people are saying that the two ints that Bradford threw weren't his fault, and I would disagree.

The first pick was a bad decision, for two reasons.

He threw that ball into a crowd, and bad things often happen when a QB does that.

He also threw that ball short of the goal line in a situation that demanded he get that ball into the end zone.

The second pick, while not a bad throw, was a little high and it gave the DB the opportunity to make a play on the ball.

That being said, this was the first game that Bradford really faced consistent pressure, and while he did make a couple of questionable decisions, overall, I thought he showed a lot of things to build on.

Are you fucking kidding? You can't put that 2nd one on him. Questionable if you could the 1st, but the 2nd? Bull shit, I don't think a QB that isn't "someones guy" could ever live up to expectations around here.

Stafford sucked for a whole half, but you point out that Bradford threw a ball that his receiver had in his hands might have been a couple inches off.............

milkman
01-10-2009, 10:23 AM
Are you ****ing kidding? You can't put that 2nd one on him. Questionable if you could the 1st, but the 2nd? Bull shit, I don't think a QB that isn't s"someone guy" could ever live up to expectations around here.

Stafford sucked for a whole half, but you point out that Bradford threw a ball that his receiver had in his hands might have been a couple inches off.............

You think that second pick was right on the money?

smittysbar
01-10-2009, 10:25 AM
You think that second pick was right on the money?

Let me see, he had it in his hands before the defender took it away, it was a good throw that should have been caught.

milkman
01-10-2009, 10:30 AM
Let me see, he had it in his hands before the defender took it away, it was a good throw that should have been caught.

It was a decent throw, but it wasn't right on the money, and Iglecius(?) had to stretch for it.

It hit his hands, but because he did have to extend himself, he didn't get the chance to pull it in before the defender had the opportunity to make a play.

It was an outstanding play, but if that ball is right on the money, he doesn't get that opportunity.

smittysbar
01-10-2009, 10:47 AM
It was a decent throw, but it wasn't right on the money, and Iglecius(?) had to stretch for it.

It hit his hands, but because he did have to extend himself, he didn't get the chance to pull it in before the defender had the opportunity to make a play.

It was an outstanding play, but if that ball is right on the money, he doesn't get that opportunity.

Spitting hairs, not only did it hit him in the hands, he had the ball. He heard the defender coming and pulled up. Should have been caught, no question.

milkman
01-10-2009, 10:50 AM
Spitting hairs, not only did it hit him in the hands, he had the ball. He heard the defender coming and pulled up. Should have been caught, no question.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

But, as I said, I saw a lot to like from Bradford in that game.

He showed more in his worst statistical game that he ever did in all those pinball games he played.

smittysbar
01-10-2009, 10:58 AM
We'll have to agree to disagree.

But, as I said, I saw a lot to like from Bradford in that game.

He showed more in his worst statistical game that he ever did in all those pinball games he played.

Cool, I agree he showed me what I wanted to see, still the 3rd best though if all 3 come out.

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 11:08 AM
It's hilarious seeing the vitriol on this board whenever the great QB discussion surfaces. The outright hatred of Bradford reminds me of the hatred of Ryan last year - you'd think some would be a bit more humble after that whiff.

Interesting piece from the NY Times on Bradford:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/10/sports/ncaafootball/10pros.html?_r=2&ref=sports

Gil Brandt says he's an easy top ten pick, and a scout says he's a "no brainer" #1 pick and compares him to Aikman.

“When you’ve watched him at Oklahoma over the years, he sticks out like a sore thumb,” the scout said. “He’s not a nickel-dime, dink-and-dunk guy. He throws those deep balls as good as anyone I’ve ever seen.”

Bradford is ranked No. 1 by some draft experts, and there are only minor questions about him. Bradford, 21, has not quite filled in his 6-foot-4 frame — he is listed at 218 pounds — and Oklahoma’s offense has kept him from facing much pass-rush pressure. Still, the positives are considered impressive.

“He’s got the size, the arm, the feet and the release,” the scout said. “He makes good decisions. He seems like a really easy guy to evaluate.”

It's interesting how people can watch the same tape and come away with such different conclusions.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 11:16 AM
It's hilarious seeing the vitriol on this board whenever the great QB discussion surfaces. The outright hatred of Bradford reminds me of the hatred of Ryan last year - you'd think some would be a bit more humble after that whiff.

Interesting piece from the NY Times on Bradford:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/10/sports/ncaafootball/10pros.html?_r=2&ref=sports

Gil Brandt says he's an easy top ten pick, and a scout says he's a "no brainer" #1 pick and compares him to Aikman.



It's interesting how people can watch the same tape and come away with such different conclusions.



I'm not sure where you're getting all this supposed "hate" for Bradford.

Because people think he's the 3rd prospect behind Sanchez and Stafford?

Almost universally, people have said that he has the physical tools it will take to be successful, but is going to have to learn playing from under center, learning to drop properly, and reading defenses - something the other two have a huge head start on.

If that is what you consider hate, then you have really thin skin.

And regarding Brandt, he thinks Tebow is a late 1st round pick, so forgive me if I'm not fawning over his opinion. And I noticed the Times piece didn't say a word about his question marks.

If you've watched ANY sports programming over the course of the past 48 hours, almost universally, the talking heads have talked about there being a huge learning curve for Bradford because of the system he plays in - something the other two hold a huge advantage over Bradford.

I'm not sure why this is so fucking complicated for people.

FringeNC
01-10-2009, 11:19 AM
I'm not sure where you're getting all this supposed "hate" for Bradford.

Because people think he's the 3rd prospect behind Sanchez and Stafford?

Almost universally, people have said that he has the physical tools it will take to be successful, but is going to have to learn playing from under center, learning to drop properly, and reading defenses - something the other two have a huge head start on.

If that is what you consider hate, then you have really thin skin.

And regarding Brandt, he thinks Tebow is a late 1st round pick, so forgive me if I'm not fawning over his opinion. And I noticed the Times piece didn't say a word about his question marks.

If you've watched ANY sports programming over the course of the past 48 hours, almost universally, the talking heads have talked about there being a huge learning curve for Bradford because of the system he plays in - something the other two hold a huge advantage over Bradford.

I'm not sure why this is so ****ing complicated for people.

Bradford's supposed to be off the charts intelligent. I'm not concerned about his learning curve. I'd be more concerned about his Croyle-like physique.

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 11:23 AM
I'm not sure where you're getting all this supposed "hate" for Bradford.

Because people think he's the 3rd prospect behind Sanchez and Stafford?

Really? Read through the whole thread, and read through past threads. People highly exaggerate his weaknesses, anyone that says they like him is attacked, people make fun of the way he looks, etc.

The rational discussions on him are few and far between.

Almost universally, people have said that he has the physical tools it will take to be successful, but is going to have to learn playing from under center, learning to drop properly, and reading defenses - something the other two have a huge head start on.

If that is what you consider hate, then you have really thin skin.

Read above. People on here also claim he has a noodle arm, does bubble screens all day, shit on him for the spread even though OU runs more of a pro-style spread than what Tech or Mizzou runs. The arguments against him are fair on the surface, but the exaggerations are just hysterically ridiculous.

And regarding Brandt, he thinks Tebow is a late 1st round pick, so forgive me if I'm not fawning over his opinion. And I noticed the Times piece didn't say a word about his question marks.

So who's viewpoint would you "fawn" over? Not Kiper or McShay. Mayock? Or would you pull this argument out on anyone who favored Bradford?

If you've watched ANY sports programming over the course of the past 48 hours, almost universally, the talking heads have talked about there being a huge learning curve for Bradford because of the system he plays in - something the other two hold a huge advantage over Bradford.

I'm not sure why this is so ****ing complicated for people.

Sorry if I don't listen to Herbstreit and Corso for draft analysis.

the Talking Can
01-10-2009, 11:29 AM
It's hilarious seeing the vitriol on this board whenever the great QB discussion surfaces. The outright hatred of Bradford reminds me of the hatred of Ryan last year - you'd think some would be a bit more humble after that whiff.

Interesting piece from the NY Times on Bradford:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/10/sports/ncaafootball/10pros.html?_r=2&ref=sports

Gil Brandt says he's an easy top ten pick, and a scout says he's a "no brainer" #1 pick and compares him to Aikman.



It's interesting how people can watch the same tape and come away with such different conclusions.

"Oklahoma’s offense has kept him from facing much pass-rush pressure. "


um, this is exactly what this board has been saying forever....and now it is confirmed....

what's really funny is that there are people on this board who believe that Aikman was only a "game manager" and not a franchise QB...I wonder if any of those idiots are Bradford fans?

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 11:29 AM
Really? Read through the whole thread, and read through past threads. People highly exaggerate his weaknesses, anyone that says they like him is attacked, people make fun of the way he looks, etc.

The rational discussions on him are few and far between.



Read above. People on here also claim he has a noodle arm, does bubble screens all day, shit on him for the spread even though OU runs more of a pro-style spread than what Tech or Mizzou runs. The arguments against him are fair on the surface, but the exaggerations are just hysterically ridiculous.



So who's viewpoint would you "fawn" over? Not Kiper or McShay. Mayock? Or would you pull this argument out on anyone who favored Bradford?



Sorry if I don't listen to Herbstreit and Corso for draft analysis.



Well, that clears it up.

Thin skin.

I wish I had the time to look, but I'd be willing to be that of all the guys that think Bradford is the #1 QB of the 3, that 95%+ of them are OU fans.

Trust me, I HOPE Bradford goes #1.

That all but hands us Stafford or Sanchez if the new GM wants them.

the Talking Can
01-10-2009, 11:29 AM
Really? Read through the whole thread, and read through past threads. People highly exaggerate his weaknesses, anyone that says they like him is attacked, people make fun of the way he looks, etc.

The rational discussions on him are few and far between.



Read above. People on here also claim he has a noodle arm, does bubble screens all day, shit on him for the spread even though OU runs more of a pro-style spread than what Tech or Mizzou runs. The arguments against him are fair on the surface, but the exaggerations are just hysterically ridiculous.



So who's viewpoint would you "fawn" over? Not Kiper or McShay. Mayock? Or would you pull this argument out on anyone who favored Bradford?



Sorry if I don't listen to Herbstreit and Corso for draft analysis.

other than mecca and hamas, who are you crying about?

milkman
01-10-2009, 11:31 AM
Well, that clears it up.

Thin skin.

I wish I had the time to look, but I'd be willing to be that of all the guys that think Bradford is the #1 QB of the 3, that 95%+ of them are OU fans.

Trust me, I HOPE Bradford goes #1.

That all but hands us Stafford or Sanchez if the new GM wants them.

I haven't heard.

Has Sanchez announced a decision yet?

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 11:32 AM
I haven't heard.

Has Sanchez announced a decision yet?

Nope.

If I'm him, I take right up until the deadline.

Tribal Warfare
01-10-2009, 11:33 AM
Well, that clears it up.

Thin skin.

I wish I had the time to look, but I'd be willing to be that of all the guys that think Bradford is the #1 QB of the 3, that 95%+ of them are OU fans.

Trust me, I HOPE Bradford goes #1.

That all but hands us Stafford or Sanchez if the new GM wants them.

Honestly, I don't think he'll declare after watching the National Championship and not winning it.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 11:37 AM
Honestly, I don't think he'll declare after watching the National Championship and not winning it.

He'd be screwing himself, IMO.

He'll be leaving some serious money on the table if he does. OU is losing a lot on offense, and he's not going to repeat these video game stats without that OL. Not to mention the risk of injury.

If the NFL tells you you're a Top 15 pick, and you pass, then you're insane.

That's exactly why Maclin broke down repeatedly during his presser yesterday. You could tell he wanted to come back, but knew that he'd be risking his future if he did.

Tribal Warfare
01-10-2009, 11:44 AM
He'd be screwing himself, IMO.

He'll be leaving some serious money on the table if he does. OU is losing a lot on offense, and he's not going to repeat these video game stats without that OL. Not to mention the risk of injury.

If the NFL tells you you're a Top 15 pick, and you pass, then you're insane.

That's exactly why Maclin broke down repeatedly during his presser yesterday. You could tell he wanted to come back, but knew that he'd be risking his future if he did.

It's also playing the odds if Sanchez comes up, odds are next year he'll be 1st QB selected in the top 3 or 5

Brock
01-10-2009, 11:46 AM
You don't want to end up like Brohm.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 11:47 AM
You don't want to end up like Brohm.

THIS.

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 12:06 PM
"Oklahoma’s offense has kept him from facing much pass-rush pressure. "


um, this is exactly what this board has been saying forever....and now it is confirmed....

what's really funny is that there are people on this board who believe that Aikman was only a "game manager" and not a franchise QB...I wonder if any of those idiots are Bradford fans?

WTF are you babbling about with that last point?

The other part is that he's a "no brainer" #1 pick, yet the majority of this board acts like he's not even a 1st round pick this year. There's a disconnect here, and I'm pointing it out. Just like there was a disconnect last year when 99% of this board acted like Ryan would be the worst pick ever, and they were completely wrong.

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 12:08 PM
Well, that clears it up.

Thin skin.

I wish I had the time to look, but I'd be willing to be that of all the guys that think Bradford is the #1 QB of the 3, that 95%+ of them are OU fans.

Trust me, I HOPE Bradford goes #1.

That all but hands us Stafford or Sanchez if the new GM wants them.

Yeah, you surely don't have time to look it up, considering you're on here 24 hours a day. :rolleyes:

Who cares about the ranking of the three players; I'm talking about acknowledging that Bradford is a solid pro prospect. The majority on this board are simply incapable of giving him his due props.

milkman
01-10-2009, 12:11 PM
Yeah, you surely don't have time to look it up, considering you're on here 24 hours a day. :rolleyes:

Who cares about the ranking of the three players; I'm talking about acknowledging that Bradford is a solid pro prospect. The majority on this board are simply incapable of giving him his due props.

Majority?

Embellish much?

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 12:11 PM
WTF are you babbling about with that last point?

The other part is that he's a "no brainer" #1 pick,

In who's opinion? This ONE scout you reference? There's a combination of 4-5 guys that could end up being the 1st pick, and a lot of mocks reflect that.

yet the majority of this board acts like he's not even a 1st round pick this year.

Wow, talk about exaggeration. I've yet to see ANYONE who SERIOUSLY thinks the guy isn't a 1st round pick.

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 12:12 PM
Majority?

Embellish much?

Seriously?

You don't think more than 50% of the people into the draft on this board exaggerate Bradford's weaknesses? Just go through this thread again if you don't believe me.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 12:14 PM
Yeah, you surely don't have time to look it up, considering you're on here 24 hours a day. :rolleyes:

Who cares about the ranking of the three players; I'm talking about acknowledging that Bradford is a solid pro prospect. The majority on this board are simply incapable of giving him his due props.

You never go full retard.

Read THIS thread.

If you're smart enough to be able to sort through the guys that are making comments to get under the skin of the OU fans, and the guys that actually know a few things about football and the draft, you'd see that people ARE giving him props.

But they are also pointing out his shortcomings, just like they have with Stafford (decision making and inconsistency) and Sanchez. (only 1 full year as a starter)

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 12:14 PM
In who's opinion? This ONE scout you reference? There's a combination of 4-5 guys that could end up being the 1st pick, and a lot of mocks reflect that.

Yes. If he's going to bring up the system point, which has been discussed ad nauseum (and mainly incorrectly), then he should bring up the other point that this scout thinks he's a #1 overall pick.

milkman
01-10-2009, 12:16 PM
Seriously?

You don't think more than 50% of the people into the draft on this board exaggerate Bradford's weaknesses? Just go through this thread again if you don't believe me.

I think almost everyone in a debate is going to focus on the strengths of the player they are backing, and the weaknesses of the player they aren't.

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 12:18 PM
You never go full retard.

Read THIS thread.

If you're smart enough to be able to sort through the guys that are making comments to get under the skin of the OU fans, and the guys that actually know a few things about football and the draft, you'd see that people ARE giving him props.

But they are also pointing out his shortcomings, just like they have with Stafford (decision making and inconsistency) and Sanchez. (only 1 full year as a starter)

People gloss over the questions about Stafford and Sanchez, and go into full on exaggeration mode when it comes to Bradford.

I'm a member of a few football boards, and the hatred of Bradford on here is unrivaled. What's even funnier is that the haters just can't admit that they're biased.

I thought people would be a bit more humble in their QB analysis this year after most on the board were completely and utterly wrong on Ryan this year, but apparently that's not how the loudest posters on here operate.

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 12:19 PM
I think almost everyone in a debate is going to focus on the strengths of the player they are backing, and the weaknesses of the player they aren't.

Why is it even a debate? Why is this board seemingly incapable of discussing the players without including biases? It's not impossible.

kstater
01-10-2009, 12:20 PM
People gloss over the questions about Stafford and Sanchez, and go into full on exaggeration mode when it comes to Bradford.

I'm a member of a few football boards, and the hatred of Bradford on here is unrivaled. What's even funnier is that the haters just can't admit that they're biased.

I thought people would be a bit more humble in their QB analysis this year after most on the board were completely and utterly wrong on Ryan this year, but apparently that's not how the loudest posters on here operate.

As opposed to you and your completely unbiased love of Bradford.

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 12:21 PM
As opposed to you and your completely unbiased love of Bradford.

I have him 3rd in my QB rankings, but yeah. :rolleyes:

milkman
01-10-2009, 12:23 PM
People gloss over the questions about Stafford and Sanchez, and go into full on exaggeration mode when it comes to Bradford.

I'm a member of a few football boards, and the hatred of Bradford on here is unrivaled. What's even funnier is that the haters just can't admit that they're biased.

I thought people would be a bit more humble in their QB analysis this year after most on the board were completely and utterly wrong on Ryan this year, but apparently that's not how the loudest posters on here operate.

And the people that don't like Stafford gloss over the questions about Bradford.

Hell we have some dumbass telling us that Stafford doesn't run a pro style offense like Bradford.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 12:24 PM
People gloss over the questions about Stafford and Sanchez, and go into full on exaggeration mode when it comes to Bradford.

I'm a member of a few football boards, and the hatred of Bradford on here is unrivaled. What's even funnier is that the haters just can't admit that they're biased.

I thought people would be a bit more humble in their QB analysis this year after most on the board were completely and utterly wrong on Ryan this year, but apparently that's not how the loudest posters on here operate.

Who glosses over Stafford and Sanchez' question marks?

It's been discussed to death around here.

Bradford - lack of experience in pro-style offense, making reads for himself, taking snaps under center, will need to learn 3, 5 and 7 step drops.

Stafford - inconsistent, questionable decision making, seems to play lights out against weak competition, and struggles against top competition.

Sanchez - only has one year of starting experience.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 12:25 PM
Hell we have some dumbass telling us that Stafford doesn't run a pro style offense like Bradford.

This.

Again, if you can't sort through the dumbasses, then that's on you.

Marcellus
01-10-2009, 12:31 PM
I don't think any of the big 3 QB's is worthy of the 3rd pick but I am in the minority.