I doubt it.

nah ... opposites imo

Jones is physically gifted but is a puss


Bradford has intangibles but not great physical tools

It's fun watching Hootie sucking off Flutie 2.

More like a poor man's Bradford.

Nobody bite.

The Jagoff fan throwing another line in the water waiting for some dumb bastard to fall for his trolling.

I think he's referring to Landry

Don't know why I didn't put that dumb slut on ignore a long time ago. It's obvious he contributes absolutely nothing to the board but to satisfy his own trolling erection.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9...61vto1_400.gif

Nope. Try again please...
Posted via Mobile Device

I actually agree with Hootie.

It's not about his game.
It's about his presence.

if people want to compare Geno to Bradford. That's cool. Bradford is talented as ****. I wouldn't consider him a bust yet, he looked like he was getting better at the end of the year and well, even if their game was exactly the same (which it isn't), they are 2 different people and 1 will be better than the other.

And are you really willing to say that Romo, Cutler, Rivers and Stafford can't win a SB? Because if so, you're saying that Geno Smith will be a failure as a #1 draft pick if he isn't better than all 4 of those guys - damn, that's asking a shitload isn't it? With those 4 guys in the mix, you really do have the top 1/2 of the league as a 'championship caliber' QB.

Quarterback remains the most important position in sports, but it's also become the most overhyped. You absolutely, positively cannot win in the NFL with a bad quarterback. However, the more I've looked at the league over the last couple of months, the more I've realized that all you really need to have is a guy in the top 1/2 or so.

The reason you roll the dice on a guy like Geno Smith is that a truly elite QB is still a force multiplier and a nice way to cover for some weaknesses. It's no doubt easier to win with a top 5 guy.

But if 15 is the best you can do, take heart - you can still win and win big with that guy.

If you don't think Bradford was better coming out of Oklahoma, then you are ****ing high.

Excluding his injury season, he had 50 touchdowns to 8 interceptions and 4700 yards passing, as well as 5 rushing TDs his Sophomore year.

I don't see Flacco as better than Romo, Cutler or Rivers whatsoever.

In fact everyone here knows I have a hardon for Cutler and Rivers.

That's funny because Flacco is the only QB listed with a SB ring.

I'll take Bradford, Cutler, Romo, or Flacco. No discrimination here. All can be successful in this league.

That's because you never played and don't really understand why you play harder for guys that look at themselves as equal to the rest of the team and not above them.

There is a way to be a leader and there is a way to impersonate a leader.

I don't think Romo deserves to be mentioned with Cutler and Rivers...those two are crybabies.

Romo has just been undiciplined due to the coaching staffs he as played under.

That's stupid. Philip Rivers is a great teammate by all accounts.

His problem is shitty supporting cast and shitty head coach.

Shit, I'd trade the #1 for Rivers.

So, aside from the fact that Geno has played in a pro-style offense, can actually complete passes downfield, has mobility, and has never been injured, he's Sam Bradford.

Yeah, that makes sense.

I think Geno is a much better prospect than Bradford, but even if Geno turns out to be the second coming of Bradford I'm fine with it. Its time to roll the dice. It like the lottery folks say, you can't win if you don't play.

You know, Bradford had a different resume. It involved winning games in a major football conference, that kind of thing.

There is no god damn way Geno is a better prospect than Bradford was. Bradford was considered the inevitable #1 overall in 2009, instead went back to school, missed most of the season, and still went #1 overall in 2010.

I don't see people salivating over Geno outside of this forum.

Lots of Jaguars and Raiders fans are.

I had a friendly feud the last 8 weeks of the year with the guy who runs bigcatcountry.com. We both kept needling each other, insisting the other's team would **** up, win a game and blow the #1 pick.

I won. :D

Was it the Alfie guy that everyone hates and that the readers of BCC made a post about the other day saying he needs to have less involvement with the site?

Yea that guy is a real charmer.

I don't give a fu@k about what the experts say. They opinions on Geno this year don't make any sense. Its bullshit.

Too far. Slow roll please...
Posted via Mobile Device

I'm just ecstatic that someone could compare Geno to a white QB. Now we all persevere until the day when a white WR is not compared with Wes Welker.

No, I completely blanked on Romo, Cutler, and Stafford. Whoops.

Personally, I think Rivers is done. Romo and Cutler on their current teams make it difficult for them to reach a SB IMO but they could definitely do it as far as their individual talents go.

So now geno is white?

That's b/c outside of this forum, the majority of fans fall in line with what the pundits say. Educated fans or not. The difference here is, Chiefs fans are sick and ****ing tired of Matt Cassel and every other QB in his image. We don't want it, we know where it gets us. Nowhere.

This team is too talented to finish 2-14.

Didn't make reads in college.

Multiple injuries, including one that cost him his last year at Okl.

Strictly a shotgun spread monkey.

Keep in mind, my team ALSO finished 2-14. I would still be uneasy with the Jaguars taking Geno. Especially with so many good prospects coming out next year.

But Bradford was absolutely insane in college.

You should look up the percentages of first read passes by Geno. As well as what type of offense he played in...

Ok so let's look deeper into the Bradford comparison.

Bradfords predraft cons:
1. Spread/shotgun QB.
2. Played on an exceptional team, behind a brick wall line. He faced very little adversity or pass rush in college.
3. What else? I remember those 2 as the main issues. He was pretty thin iirc.

Bradfords NFL shortcomings:
1. Plays poorly under QB pressure. Kind of goes back to #2 above. As good as his OU line was, his STL line has been bad. He's still learning to make plays under pursuit.
2.Durability? As others have said, he seems to always have something wrong with him.
3. What else?

Overall it seems that some of the pre draft concerns have been justified. It's also clear that he's played behind a bad line with limited weapons to throw to. If I'm a Rams fan, I would have expected better but certainly wouldn't be ready to flush.

There is a reason why Fisher slammed his glasses on the table when the Jags moved up to take the stud in my avatar. He was hoping to weaponize Bradford.

I still remember that game Bradford had against Texas Tech. That was redonk.

Then how do Geno's cons compare?

1. His current system is also a spread. I know he played in a pro style, but don't pretend to know how his footwork looked in his dropbacks. Thats the biggest issue with spread QBs imo, footwork is 3, 5, and 7 step drops.

2. Geno has faced more adversity. Every game he played this year was on his shoulders due to poor defense. His "bad" games came against his toughest opponents, but how bad was he in those games?

3. Size? He's a little small, would like to see him thickened up, but he's been durable.

I don't think Geno joining the Chiefs would be as rough as Bradords introduction to the league. He'll have a better line, and better weapons (assuming Bowe and Albert return).

Geno's resume doesn't match Bradford's, but he didn't have the luxury of playing on the 2009 Sooners either.

Dear lord...did you just say Geno faced more adversity? Geno was barely on the map last year.

Bradford spent an entire sophomore season contending for a national title, winning the Big 12, then losing in the national championship. And then he got injured and missed almost an entire year.

Unless your definition of adversity only includes the quality of their own team. Which would be stupid.

Bradford's qb'd a ton of blowouts playing for an exceptional team behind an incredible Oline.

I'm certain it was an issue in pre draft evaluations. He played on a big stage, but he was surrounded by stellar college talent.

I don't think Rivers is done. I do think he was burnt out on that team the way they were. Get some new life in him and I think he will be ok. Him and Romo need to get over the hump and stop making bonehead mistakes at the worst times. Maybe they won't, but I still think they both have a chance. I would not be upset if Rivers was the QB of the Chiefs.

Bradford had six NFL starters on his offense alone, with several other NFL players as backup depth or NFL backups as starters.

He might have played on the most talented college offense of the last decade.

You could plug almost anyone into that system and they would put up ungodly numbers.

This x1,000. Bradford and Leinart had amazing supporting casts in college.

Bradford was nowhere close to an "inevitable" #1 overall in 2009. Stafford and even Sanchez were in the conversation.

As for being taken #1 overall in 2010, well it wasn't exactly a bumper crop on QBs.

Geno combine must face **** the combine to shut naysayer assholes up.

This seems like a passive aggressive post.

?

I wouldnt call Bradford a bust. He just doesnt seem like he has a high upside.

Hes pretty blah.....sort of like Alex Smith was at #1.

Rivers was "done" the day he was drafted.

Guys with his mental makeup will never win shit.

Great post.

I agree with you here, but he was worth being picked where he was picked at the time.

So if they are both the same guy, why was Bradford the consensus #1 when he came out and the experts have been sort of blah about Geno? I dont get it....

Smith v. Bradford

Pros for Smith:

1) Less help in college. Smith has made throws under pressure and has had to get used to getting the ball out quickly, sliding to avoid pressure, making throws with pressure in his face, etc. Bradford did not face the same challenges in college.

2) More raw arm strength. The one knock on Bradford is that his arm was just "OK" for the NFL. Smith has flashed above-average arm strength.

3) DOwnfield accuracy. Smith has shown it. Bradford lived on slants in college and wasn't the deep shot artist Geno is.

Pros for Bradford

1) Played in more multiple offenses (they spent most of their time in the spread, but especially his first season as a starter, they took a lot of snaps from center, too).

2) More success. Bradford won more games in college (you can list this if you really want, though I place little stock in it).

Just my thoughts.

Because at this point in time hindsight tells us that Bradford probably shouldn't have been the consensus #1?

1) Bradford played at a traditional power that was in the national title hunt both years he was healthy.

2) Bradford is white.

Unfortunately, im starting to believe just this.

A month ago Brooks compared Smith to Jason Campbell.

Oh, also... Bradford is represented by Tom Condon of CAA...

imo Bradford is better at this point in his career than Smith was. I thought he looked pretty good this year when Amendola was healthy. Maybe not yet #1 overall good, but he played well enough to give Rams fans hope. But I do see where you're coming from that he just doesn't seem to have that whatever it is.

I guess a point comes when you have to stop making excuses for a guy, but Bradford has had a really shitty line and crap for receivers for most of his career.

The common thing w/ Bradford and Smith was neither had any consistency in terms of coaching. I think Smith had like 6 OC's in 5 years and Bradford has had 3 in 3 years. This will be the first season where he's actually had some continuity. I think his game to the next level this season (and they get him some help at WR).

Yeah, i'd say its far more positive than negative... if he's Bradford with a stronger arm, sign me up.

Consensus 1? Maybe not. Top QB taken? Who else would you have taken? Should they have just sat on their hands for 2 years so they could have RG3?

And #1 overall in 2010 was a helluva lot bigger commitment than #1 overall is in 2013

They have excuses.

And am I being a homer when I say I think KC is the best "worst team in football" in a long time?

He's the guy I hear people comparing Geno Smith to when it comes to mental makeup/composure. I don't know how fair that comparison is, but it's one of the areas of concern for Smith.

Considering the 0-16 Lions, 1-15 Rams, 1-15 Panthers, and already talent-depleted Colts minus Peyton Manning, no I don't think you'd be wrong saying that. I think we're the first team in a long time to reach that low point in spite of a magnificent ball carrier, pretty good offensive line, and some talent here and there at LB and secondary.

Really? I honestly don't see that at all. Hell, I'm trying to think of a single game where he lost his composure.

Yeah, if we bring in a rookie QB, he's not coming into a trainwreck. But by the same token, he doesn't have as many excuses.

Absolutely no excuses.

A rook should be able to win 6 games with this team.

If they bring in a vet like Alex Smith, they should make the playoffs.

I think it's based on a few sideline incidents. I didn't see those incidents, I'm just passing on what I heard. I believe Smith's coaches and teammates have downplayed those incidents too. That's why I said I wasn't sure how fair the comparisons are.

Pinstripe bowl

The person who made the comparisons in the article has the Chiefs taking Geno Smith #1 overall.

They're just comparisons to player type though I think. I doubt he believes Kenny Vaccaro is going to have the same kind of career Charles Woodson did. He just means he's a hybrid type safety.

will he throw at the combine?

He said he will.

college w/l record is teh most important over skillz and teh intagibles HERP DERP DERP DERP!
Posted via Mobile Device

Yeah, I'm sure those 4 1st-round picks in the next 2 drafts will pale in comparison to broke-knee RG3.

Holgorsen pretty directly stated that Smith tried to press and force things, exacerbating the blowout (via KStateSports):

"He was, and we all were. We talked about it all week. ‘Don't get impatient. Don't get impatient.' You have the ball a couple of times and you look up there and you're down 17 points. You start pressing. It's inevitable. We were trying to score 14 points in one play. That is just not very good offensive football. You can't have that mindset."

Exactly. Very similar to Sam Bradford, which is the very reason I don't want to draft him #1.

They didn't necessarily choose Bradford over RG3.

They chose to keep developing Bradford plus

Moving down to #6 (traded again to Dallas for #14 DT Michael Brockers and #45, traded again to Bears for #50 RB Isaiah Pead, outplayed by 7th round RB Daryl Washington, and #150 OT Watkins, whom I know nothing about) Note Chicago used #45 on WR Alshon Jeffrey, whom I think would have helped STL more than Brian Quick, or Pead and a 5th round OT.
and 2nd round #39 CB Janoris Jenkins
and 2013 1st round pick (#22)
and 2014 1st round pick (TBD)

Worth it? Only time will tell, but two 1st round picks the next couple years is a good position to build around Bradford IMO.

I musta missed all the Bradford comparisons you were making prior to this thread.

What exactly are they similar with? Height?