2014 NFL draft and offseason thread: your mock draft, team wish list, and more

Page 53 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Jimzz

Jimzz

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2012
4,399
190
106
Yea either Bradford takes a HUGH pay cut or they let him go. If the colts let go of manning the Rams would be dumb to keep Bradford.

Some think the Ram will go after Sanchez? I think that's a long shot and they had a chance when he was a free agent.
 
lupi

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
Bradford was the last of the big rookie contracts and likely to be a trivia/punch line to history now.

Somewhat shocking to hear how much more Thiesmann liked Cousins performance compared to bobby three sticks.

Niners relying on Gabbert to finally not have a total lack of offense this late in the preseason, ugh.

A couple teams looking better from last year. A couple looking shaky. A couple still looking good. And a whole lot looking like garbage. Almost like a majority of the league going out of their way to show nothing this year. For the third week, saw many teams pulling starters a lot earlier (if they even played) compared to the historical trend.
 
Jimzz

Jimzz

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2012
4,399
190
106
dougp said:
Wonder if the Rams could push for Cousins somehow.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. The redskins let Grossman go so if RG3 got hurt they would have no one that knows their system.

Now if the rams want to give up a lot of picks then maybe, but I do not see that happening.


Best bet is the Rams wait for teams to cut down to 53 to see who is out there.
 
vi edit

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,484
8,345
126
I was honestly surprised that they stuck with Bradford this long. He looked mediocre at best when healthy. They could have had RGIII two years ago and passed. Last year they had two first round picks and could have got a QB again with Bradford coming off ACL surgery and passed.

Hindsight is 20/20...but damn. Bradford must really have shown something to somebody that he was worth the wait. I just wasn't seeing it.
 
S

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
I never thought Bradford looked bad, but he just isn't worth the liability. He is missing 2 years of development with the hopes he can come back to the same level he left (which is very hard to do). What are the chances he is going to have another injury? This is two left knee injuries in 2 years...

I could understand the Rams ditching him, and him being picked up as a backup somewhere else (or possibly staying with St. Louis, but for the cheap).
 
R

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,151
108
106
smackababy said:
I never thought Bradford looked bad, but he just isn't worth the liability. He is missing 2 years of development with the hopes he can come back to the same level he left (which is very hard to do). What are the chances he is going to have another injury? This is two left knee injuries in 2 years...

I could understand the Rams ditching him, and him being picked up as a backup somewhere else (or possibly staying with St. Louis, but for the cheap).
Click to expand...

I think Bradford has underperformed since he's been in the NFL (given where he was drafted and the MASSIVE guaranteed contract), and I think they have incentive to move on.

IIRC, I think Ndomakong Suh played with 2 bad kness (or "no" kness at all).

Don't have time to look it up, though, but look how he's playing down in the trenches.
 
S

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
His rookie season and 2012 he did pretty good. If it weren't for his injury last season, he was looking to be a decent QB.
 
akugami

akugami

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2005
6,210
2,552
136
vi edit said:
I was honestly surprised that they stuck with Bradford this long. He looked mediocre at best when healthy. They could have had RGIII two years ago and passed. Last year they had two first round picks and could have got a QB again with Bradford coming off ACL surgery and passed.

Hindsight is 20/20...but damn. Bradford must really have shown something to somebody that he was worth the wait. I just wasn't seeing it.
Click to expand...

In defense of Bradford, he's physically gifted...and in condemnation of Bradford, we've seen time and time again where the QB doesn't have "QB smarts" or doesn't have the dedication to be a good QB and fail.

Now, Bradford hasn't been that bad but IMHO, he hasn't been that great either. Rams have shown great patience and loyalty but it's time to move to a new QB.
 
SunnyD

SunnyD

Belgian Waffler
Jan 2, 2001
32,675
146
106
www.neftastic.com
vi edit

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,484
8,345
126
Retro Rob said:
Agreed, but a number 1 draft pick simply cannot be a "decent" player. He's reminding me of Mark Sanchez.
Click to expand...

Bradford is no Butt Fumbler. He was just positively mediocre. To me he was no better or worse than Kyle Orton. He wouldn't outright lose you a game, but he wasn't a guy that was going to come in and surgically destroy a team in the two minute drill either.

He is one of those guys that would have likely thrived sitting on a bench for 2-3 years behind a very talented veteran QB and slowly take over a starter position. Instead he was out there getting sacked every week as a rookie.
 
S

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
Retro Rob said:
Agreed, but a number 1 draft pick simply cannot be a "decent" player. He's reminding me of Mark Sanchez.
Click to expand...

At least, he isn't another JaMarcus Russell. Bradford has the athletic tools, he is just lacking some of the finer points of being a QB. It doesn't help he plays for a terrible team.
 
zinfamous

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,904
31,429
146
smackababy said:
At least, he isn't another JaMarcus Russell. Bradford has the athletic tools, he is just lacking some of the finer points of being a QB. It doesn't help he plays for a terrible team.
Click to expand...

St Louis has been decent for two years now, and was actually pretty good last year in what was the toughest division in Football. ....They probably would have won the AFC South, for example.

They are pretty talented this year, too.
 
manimal

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,559
8
0
smackababy said:
At least, he isn't another JaMarcus Russell. Bradford has the athletic tools, he is just lacking some of the finer points of being a QB. It doesn't help he plays for a terrible team.
Click to expand...

Sometimes guys are just unlucky. sometimes guys are just brittle. Bradford is both. He would probably do well taking an entire year off like Clausen did and come back as a backup. Hope he saved his money....




Jamarcus has/had a big character faults and all the tools in the world. Bradford has most of those tools but is built like a house of cards. Russel could probably get pounded on like Cam and survive though Cam cant take the hits like he used to.


Bradford didnt have the self preversation gene that Peyton has. Peyton has always gotten down and barely gets hit because he knows he will crumble like a cobbler.
 
R

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,151
108
106
zinfamous said:
St Louis has been decent for two years now, and was actually pretty good last year in what was the toughest division in Football. ....They probably would have won the AFC South, for example.

They are pretty talented this year, too.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Rams are a pretty decent team on offense, great defense IMO. Yep, the division is the issue. Like Sanchez's d in NY, Bradford could have looked good (but in reality, overrated) behind that d.
 
S

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
Retro Rob said:
Yeah, the Rams are a pretty decent team on offense, great defense IMO. Yep, the division is the issue. Like Sanchez's d in NY, Bradford could have looked good (but in reality, overrated) behind that d.
Click to expand...

I think it was more that Bradford took over as a rookie and had to carry a team. He didn't get a learning period or have someone decent to learn from.

St. Louis had had their ups and downs since he began. His rookie season showed some promise, but that was in a division where the winner was 7-9 (who then beast quaked a playoff win). Bradford's next season was 2-14 in a much better division. They have recovered a bit, but not enough to run with good teams. St. Louis isn't a good team and certainly wouldn't have won the AFC South. Two of the teams really imploded, but Indy still would have won that division with any team swapped for the Rams.
 
Fern

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Jimzz said:
Yea either Bradford takes a HUGH pay cut or they let him go. If the colts let go of manning the Rams would be dumb to keep Bradford.

Some think the Ram will go after Sanchez? I think that's a long shot and they had a chance when he was a free agent.
Click to expand...

Earlier today I saw it reported that Sanchez isn't interested. He doesn't want to work with that OC again; Sanchez floundered under his offense before. And Sanchez looks to be doing pretty well under Kelley's offense.

Fern
 
Gibsons

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
Fern said:
Earlier today I saw it reported that Sanchez isn't interested. He doesn't want to work with that OC again; Sanchez floundered under his offense before. And Sanchez looks to be doing pretty well under Kelley's offense.

Fern
Click to expand...

Brian Schottenheimer doesn't inspire a lot of confidence, does he?

I think the Rams should just stick with Hill for this season. Trading for someone will be very pricey at this point and is unlikely to be a significant improvement anyway. Take your lumps, see if you can grab a QB next year. No point in wasting more assets trying to compensate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom