Sam Bradford Pro Day Live Feed
Started by The Saltman, Mar 29 2010 11:19 AM
41 replies to this topic
#5
Posted 29 March 2010 - 01:39 PM
Suh says hai.
#7
Posted 29 March 2010 - 02:21 PM
I think you mean
#9
Posted 29 March 2010 - 02:28 PM
#1 pick. No question about it.
Not sure about that. St Louis could easily take Suh, in which case he might not even be the first QB taken. Clausen is a much better fit with the Skins system.
#11
Posted 29 March 2010 - 02:38 PM
That's cold.
As long as he's not a Buc I'll be happy for him, though.
#13
Posted 29 March 2010 - 03:00 PM
Explain to me how Clausen has bust written all over him?
Pro-style offense in college? Check.
One of the most impressive junior seasons of any QB ever? Check.
His touchdown-interception ratio puts Peyton Manning's 1996 season to shame. His completion percentage is a good five points ahead of Philip Rivers and Ben Roethlisberger. Clausen threw six less interceptions than EVERYONE.
Anyone claiming character issues clearly hasn't done their homework. So tell me how Sam Bradford is a better QB than Jimmy Clausen.
Pro-style offense in college? Check.
One of the most impressive junior seasons of any QB ever? Check.
His touchdown-interception ratio puts Peyton Manning's 1996 season to shame. His completion percentage is a good five points ahead of Philip Rivers and Ben Roethlisberger. Clausen threw six less interceptions than EVERYONE.
Anyone claiming character issues clearly hasn't done their homework. So tell me how Sam Bradford is a better QB than Jimmy Clausen.
#15
Posted 29 March 2010 - 03:46 PM
First and foremost is that he's a Clausen. On top of that, he is probably the least physically impressive 6'4" 222lb. football player I've ever seen. He's balding. He played in a pass happy offense with NFL caliber WRs against one of the weakest schedules in college football for 3 years, and only last year did he actually excel.
Add to that he is glaringly immature and brimming with undeserved bravado. He is the definition of entitled. From an intangibles persepctive, he is the anti-Bradford. And he was a weaker arm.
Plus this:
Add to that he is glaringly immature and brimming with undeserved bravado. He is the definition of entitled. From an intangibles persepctive, he is the anti-Bradford. And he was a weaker arm.
Plus this:
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users








