Is "snooker" an appropriate draft strategy consideration?

[The Optimistic Lamb]

Redskins wasting their first two rounds on Qb's doesnt sound smart. Even if it's a bluff to get the Rams to let Bradford fall, it's still incredibly costly, and even more risky.

[AvengerRam]

Redskins wasting their first two rounds on Qb's doesnt sound smart. Even if it's a bluff to get the Rams to let Bradford fall, it's still incredibly costly, and even more risky.

Who said anything about the Redskins?

[Nick_Weasel]

If you don't rate him very highly, wouldn't you want Seattle to take him?

[AvengerRam]

I do rate him highly. I also rate Suh highly.

The question is, could a "snooker" strategy be one more pebble on the Bradford side of the balance scale?

[PeoriaRam]

I do rate him highly. I also rate Suh highly.

The question is, could a "snooker" strategy be one more pebble on the Bradford side of the balance scale?

It could be, but that particular pebble would also be another pebble in the "fire this front office soon for the good of the franchise" side of the scale. Good teams don't make critical, franchise-altering decisions based on what any one team, even a divisional rival, may do. There are 30 other teams to also take into account when thinking of moves to make, and trying to beat as many of those teams as possible is more important.

This is also a very "reactive" move on our part. Good teams are "proactive" not "reactive".

[AvengerRam]

Good teams make a lot of moves that are proactive and also geared toward their division rivals. Heck, just a few years back when we ruled the division, it seemed like Seattle went out of its way to sign our guys (i.e. Grant Wistrom, Bryce Fisher).

[PeoriaRam]

Good teams make a lot of moves that are proactive and also geared toward their division rivals. Heck, just a few years back when we ruled the division, it seemed like Seattle went out of its way to sign our guys (i.e. Grant Wistrom, Bryce Fisher).

1. I don't think either one of them represented the resource investment this particular pick does. They weren't franchise-altering moves.

2. If they didn't sign them away, we'd keep them. We'd be drafting Bradford because there's a chance Seattle might take him.

EDIT-Remember the arguments last year about Crabtree and Curry? This is very similar to those arguments, and we didn't take them because they were not worth the impact they would have on the franchise and rebuilding efforts.

[AvengerRam]

In the end, I don't know if the FO is considering this issue at all.

I do know, however, that it would make me ill if Bradford went on to have a HOF career with the Seahawks.

I didn't really have that concern with Matt Ryan or Marc Sanchez. First, neither of them was likely to go to a division rival. Second, I see something in Bradford that makes me think he has an upside greater than either of those two guys.

Anyway, given that Bulger was cut since I started this thread, this all may be moot anyway. I think its pretty clear that the Rams are going to take Bradford.

[molar_pistol]

to the original post...........the answer is simple, no.

[Ramblin` Ram]

well.. its too late where im at so i`ll come back to this when i wake up tomorrow or after school..(im a teacher not a 34 year old student who has been held back in school btw..)

but as i thought the subject of snooker would never come up in the Clan i feel i should give a shout out to my uncle Ray (Reardon) who was one of the greatest snooker players of all time and won multiple world titles in his playing days...and yes i know he looks a ringer for dracula for those who know who Ray Reardon is..but thankfully i do not....tho if any young virgin maidens out there would like to come to me, im sure i could put on a cape and accomodate you..

[Azul e Oro]

well.. its too late where im at so i`ll come back to this when i wake up tomorrow or after school..(im a teacher not a 34 year old student who has been held back in school btw..)

but as i thought the subject of snooker would never come up in the Clan i feel i should give a shout out to my uncle Ray (Reardon) who was one of the greatest snooker players of all time and won multiple world titles in his playing days...and yes i know he looks a ringer for dracula for those who know who Ray Reardon is..but thankfully i do not....tho if any young virgin maidens out there would like to come to me, im sure i could put on a cape and accomodate you..

Damn ! I remember that guy. I lived in the UK in the late seventies & my dad loved watching snooker "on the telly". He was indeed the Michael Jordan of snooker but, no offense, I would rather watch paint dry than snooker on tv..lol...Like poker,darts,bowling, or even NASCAR, it's only fun to watch in person &, for a teenager who'd grown up on the bombastic eye candy of American tv, it was achingly dull.

Remember Songs of Praise ? Again , I mean no offense to anyone who enjoys hymns but that remains one of the most insane programs ever. For those not familiar, Songs of Praise was a weekly televised hymn-singing session in a church or cathedral with the camera slowly panning over the faces of the congregation while they sang...that's it.No sermons or rockin' choir. Just plain old folk earnestly putting the glories of British dentistry on display.
Sorry...totally off-topic...

I don't agree that Wash taking a QB with their first pick is either a waste or poor strategy. That is probably a .500 team as it stands. When are they supposed to get their franchise guy if not this year? I'd say they just made it a lot easier to both win now AND build for the future.

Personally, I'd want them to go LT as well if I were a Skins fan but I think that because I believe D-Mac has a good chance of playing for a few more years & being a difference-maker, esp with a coach like Shanahan who believes in a strong run game; something McNabb hasn't had in a while. Unless he gets hurt, McNabb won't be the weak link on that team for some time,imo. I think Philly made a huge mistake.

But that's off topic,too.

Maybe Bradford drops to The Hags & they take him. Maybe they trade Hasselbeck before he loses all value like Bulger did & get a vet back-up to compete with Whitehurst & Bradford. And they have two first round picks, anyway, so it's not an all-or-nothing scenario like it is for The Rams.But it's not something that would influence The Rams' choice,imo. The best the fans can hope for is that, whomever The Hags choose, he is a disappointment like Curry has been so far.

I can't say I blame DeSpags for this situation ( though I bet Spags & Shurmur aren't too thrilled with their old Eagle buddies right now)& I agree with Nick that a trade was unlikely,anyway, but it sure puts even more pressure on DeSpags to get it right.

[The Optimistic Lamb]

Who said anything about the Redskins?

Who then, Mr. Avenger Draft-Guru, are you referring too? Seahawks?

Why would the Seahawks pay a ton of cash and trade picks for Whitehurst? Pretty elaborate conspiracy wouldn't you say?

[AvengerRam]

Why would the Seahawks pay a ton of cash and trade picks for Whitehurst?

I don't know what they see in Whitehurst, but I could just as easily ask...

Why, if the Seahawks have no interest in Bradford, did their HC travel to Oklahoma to watch his workout?

I don't know that the Seahawks would take Bradford if he fell to #6, and you don't know that they wouldn't.

[Nick]

Why, if the Seahawks have no interest in Bradford, did their HC travel to Oklahoma to watch his workout?

There are plenty of reasons why he'd go that don't include serious interest in Bradford. My question would be, hat does he have to lose in going? It's not like he's choosing between the USC and Texas pro days here. The only other events that I see on the schedule were Newberry and Texas-Kingville.

If he has nothing else better to do that day, why not show up? Maybe collect some info from some other teams, talk to some old pals and see what you can learn, and all the while make teams think about your presence there and what that might mean if Bradford does slip? It seems there's much more to gain by him being there, even if he isn't really interested, than by not going.

Ultimately, as you said, we don't know for sure one way or the other. But given what Seattle has done so far this offseason, I just don't think Carroll's presence at the pro day is that much of an indicator.

[Azul e Oro]

I don't know what they see in Whitehurst, but I could just as easily ask...

Why, if the Seahawks have no interest in Bradford, did their HC travel to Oklahoma to watch his workout?

I don't know that the Seahawks would take Bradford if he fell to #6, and you don't know that they wouldn't.

Maybe I'm just ignorant but I can't say that Michael Turner had really registered with me, either, when Atlanta plucked him off The Charger bench. Perhaps The Hags will try something similar & take Spiller; a combo of unheralded benchwarmer and a rookie playmaker in their backfield a la Turner & Ryan.

And no one knew beforehand that Bradford would look as good as he did in his workout,thus cementing his position as a top candidate. I wouldn't be the least surprised to hear that Carroll had been scouting Bradford since Pop Warner & that he might have been willing to risk the injury thing based on that greater familiarity when the NFL guys might have been scared off by a few wobbly ducks.

Besides, who'd pass up an all-expenses-paid junket to Norman, Oklahoma...?