| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Best Prospect |
| Matthew Stafford |
|
64% |
[ 49 ] |
| Sam Bradford |
|
15% |
[ 12 ] |
| Robert Griffin III |
|
19% |
[ 15 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 76 |
|
| Author |
Message |
SadLionFan00
Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 14342
Location: Michigan State University
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 3:40 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Falastine wrote: | | TD_Tommie wrote: | | SadLionFan00 wrote: |
Bradford was a late riser, if most of you remember. It wasnt until later that the Bradford #1 to the Rams hype train started (fueled by Schefter). I feel he was one of the lesser top 5 QB prospects in the past decade. |
Irrelevent, seeing as how he would have been the easy number one the year before. He wasn't a late riser. |
Honestly, I doubt the Lions would've picked Bradford over Stafford #1. |
I agree. Bradford has a strong arm and put up the nice numbers, but Stafford, at that time, had more starting experience, played in the SEC (say what you will, NFL teams seem to value that), played in a pro style offense (not to say Bradford didnt. As was mentioned earlier, he played in an offense like the one in Indy), and had better physical tools.
My biggest beef with Bradford was his upside. At least, his upside compared to other top 5 QBs. I wasnt sure he could be elite, and Im still not sure he can be elite. He looked great his rookie year, and Ill give him a pass, but Im not sure he will ever surpass QBs like Stafford (who still has a ways to go before I call him elite), Big Ben, Eli, Brees, ect.
That said, the Rams made the correct decision drafting him #1. I didnt say that at the time of the draft, but I see it as the right pick now. He may not have been as good as other top QBs to me, but he was still a very good prospect and the Rams had a huge hole at QB. No way they could pass on Bradford, even though an elite DT prospect was available.
_________________
| Silver&Black88 wrote: | | Quote: | | Trestman is a great coach but Cutler is already a pouty overconfident poo flinger. What more can he do with him? |
Get him to fling poo more accurately and make better decisions when flinging it? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
roachkiller
Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 1127
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Stafford easily for me. Physically, he has no flaws. Big, athletic, cannon for an arm and is a gamer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
footy_29
Joined: 31 Jan 2007
Posts: 11161
Location: The Frozen Tundra that is Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SadLionFan00 wrote: | Stafford easily. Followed by RGIII, with Bradford next.
Bradford was a late riser, if most of you remember. It wasnt until later that the Bradford #1 to the Rams hype train started (fueled by Schefter). I feel he was one of the lesser top 5 QB prospects in the past decade. |
Couldn't disagree with this more; what I wouldn't give to have Bradford on the Redskins under Shanahan's tutelage. I would have him in top 5 overall in terms of QBs that have come out since 2000.
_________________
Blknite01's masterpiece |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joru1000
Joined: 23 Jan 2012
Posts: 1815
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Bradford was expected to be number 1 the year Stafford came out but then he returned, and then got injured the following season, so that was his only concern. I think after he measured out to 6'5" and 235lbs he shot back to the consensus number 1 and was a big reason as to why so many analysts were saying the 2010 draft class was the most talented since 83.
How quickly we forget. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nixa37
Joined: 14 Jan 2009
Posts: 2961
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| joru1000 wrote: | Bradford was expected to be number 1 the year Stafford came out but then he returned, and then got injured the following season, so that was his only concern. I think after he measured out to 6'5" and 235lbs he shot back to the consensus number 1 and was a big reason as to why so many analysts were saying the 2010 draft class was the most talented since 83.
How quickly we forget. |
Where are people getting this? Even the guy driving the Bradford over Stafford hype train (Todd McShay) admitted that the front office people he talked to almost universally disagreed with him. Bradford didn't even decide to return until after Stafford declared and after he got back his evaluation from the NFL draft advisory committee. If people had actually been telling him he was expected to go #1 over Stafford, do you actually think he would have returned to school? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Falastine
Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 3448
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| joru1000 wrote: | Bradford was expected to be number 1 the year Stafford came out but then he returned, and then got injured the following season, so that was his only concern. I think after he measured out to 6'5" and 235lbs he shot back to the consensus number 1 and was a big reason as to why so many analysts were saying the 2010 draft class was the most talented since 83.
How quickly we forget. |
No, he wasn't. Don't make up stuff.
_________________
IN THE BAY AREA WE SMOKE PHILLIES |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GeasonNoceur
Joined: 14 Aug 2011
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| PARROTHEAD wrote: | | nixa37 wrote: | | TD_Tommie wrote: | I'd say Sam Bradford. People on here actually weren't very high on Stafford and there was a lot of hate on him.
Same goes with Bradford but it was credited to his system and weak arm (which aren't negatives to me, because there have been several good qb's coming out of the spread now, and his arm isn't really bad).
RGIII has me super excited and am a big fan of his, but I don't know if I'd draft him. Too much of a high risk - high reward player. |
That's because a lot of people on here do most of their scouting by looking at box scores. People were questioning his accuracy because of his completion percentage, but if you actually watched the games his completion percentage was low because of the throws he was being asked to make. |
Plus, didnt he have 4 freshmen on his starting line? He knew how to get rid of the ball when he had to. |
I remember he had two sophomores and three freshmen (two true and one was the LT). Same thing his sophomore yr. He had one senior and four freshmen. The whole time he was at Georgia his O-line was in shambles.
1. Stafford
(big gap)
2. RGIII
3. Bradford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31490
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Superman(DH23) wrote: | | TD_Tommie wrote: | | SadLionFan00 wrote: |
Bradford was a late riser, if most of you remember. It wasnt until later that the Bradford #1 to the Rams hype train started (fueled by Schefter). I feel he was one of the lesser top 5 QB prospects in the past decade. |
Irrelevent, seeing as how he would have been the easy number one the year before. He wasn't a late riser. |
No he wouldn't have, he would have been the 4th QB drafted had he come out. He didn't stand even close in talent to the other 3, he just happened to come out in a very weak QB class. |
You're wrong. He would have been picked before both Sanchez and Freeman. He probably would have went #2 to the Rams.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank Costello
Joined: 01 Mar 2009
Posts: 8815
Location: in 2009, Vikings>Saints
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
1: RG3
2: Stafford
3: Bradford
RG3's athleticism alone puts him above the other two. Stafford had a cannon at Georgia and played against top notch defenses. Bradford to me is still suspect. I never thought he showed that 'it' factor you want in a QB. Also came from a high scoring spread offense with tons of talent around him. Give me RG3 any day.
_________________
Welcome to Minnesota, Greg Jennings.
President of the Sammy Watkins fan club. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
