That's a good point. I should be mad at myself, not Bernie. :D
Fact: There are nearly as many teams in the past decade's playoffs without a 1st round QB as there are with a 1st round QB.Quote:
Originally Posted by BM
Truly mind-boggling, Bern.
Originally Posted by KoaKoi http://www.clanram.com/forums/images...s/viewpost.gif
ugh... you know, you'd think that one of these days, i'd learn my lesson and stop clicking on clan msg's that post bernie articles. we've known for a long time what kind of hack bernie is. i only blame me at this point.
Break the cycle ! Bernie is a bad columnist & it's not your fault. You love The Rams so you read his drivel on the subject. He cynically exploits that.
But unlike him, you are a Rams fan with a brain; don't let Bernie make you feel guilty about that.
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Av made a good point on this observation by Bernie ..Quote:
The Rams are eyeing Bradford as a strong possibility for No. 1 overall. As they should be — provided Bradford passes inspection when doctors examine his surgically repaired right shoulder.
How about if some of us cluckers are not convinced he's worth the #1 overall pick? I could care less about other teams failures, we've our share as well. It really boils down to DeSpags opinion of Sam in every phase of his game after they've done their due diligence.Quote:
Of course, the idea of drafting a quarterback first overall has caused an eruption of high-pitched clucking from the precious Chicken Littles among us. These are jittery shaking Rams fans who have decided it's insane to draft a quarterback No. 1 overall.
Nothing like stating the obvious .. hello ..Quote:
If the Rams love Bradford and are convinced that he's got the right stuff, then they should follow their judgment.
Sorry, but the Saints were not spending a #1 overall on an untested rookie quarterback. Brees had already established himself as a leader and a solid NFL quarterback ..Quote:
Someone please refresh my memory: How did Brees work out for New Orleans?
Then maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea to "ease in" a few more talented players first before we draft a QB. How about next year's crop of QBs? How do they stack up? Perhaps some of us don't see reaching for a QB this year as an absolute necessity ..Quote:
And before anyone has another anxiety attack, let me add this: Yes, the Rams need receivers and a better offensive line. I know that. I also know it would be silly to hurl an overexposed Bradford into a shark tank. The wiser approach would be to gradually ease him in.
So what you're really saying is don't be afraid to reach for need with the 1st overall pick? Macho up and let it rip?Quote:
But your best shot for finding one is in the first round.
You're kidding .. really? Thanks for the heads up on that one ..Quote:
Besides, the sky already has fallen on the Rams.
Great idea! Let's reach for need with our 1st overall, wouldn't want to be thought of as cowardly by not "manning up"Quote:
Now they need a quarterback to pump it up and put that bright sky back in place.
Hopefully the DeSpags team will not need to reference your counsel on this one Bernie ...
I'm not a Bernie hater, but he doesn't get an A on this one ..
I am dumber now, after having read this...
With our need at both positions, and assuming Bradford's shoulder is at 100%, I cannot see how Bradford could grade out higher overall than Suh. I've watched film on both and WOW! Bradford was the QB in a great system with great personnel surrounding him. He's good, but it wasn't all him. Suh, on the other hand was a One-Man-Wrecking Machine. He was a standout all on his own.
I understand the quandry we are in, but... I would grade Suh higher and pull the trigger on him as soon as the clock starts ticking. IMHO, of course.
I like Bradford, and think he'll most likely be a solid NFL QB, but I am concerned about his shoulder and I think the concern is legitimate, regardless of what Bernie tells us. Yes, Brees worked out, but there are plenty of players who do not work out after surgery. It's definitely something that needs to be looked at very closely in making a decision as franchise affecting as the #1 pick in the draft.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie
Yep, I ALWAYS preface every thread title with Bernie's name to warn everybody what they're getting into.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by KoaKoi
Bernie ... bah! Draft Suh 1st. Ask QB questions later. :ram:
Was Bernie's article that bad or were people simply bashing Bernie because its become the cool thing to do around here?
He's merely using the same screwy logic darn near every other analyst has been using, he's just getting bashed more becuase you guys have some kind of personal vendetta against Bernie and not the other guys.
I understand the BPA talk, but honestly, its not that great of an approach all the time.
If you have a young Peyton MAnning or just drafted a QB last year, and the BPA in the draft is lo and behold, a QB, do you draft him?
of course not.
Same in this situation, our D-Line is far from being the fearsome foursome but its not a glaring weak point, and considering the D-Line talent this year as opposed to the QB talent this year, I think there is a significant drop-off after the first round guys are gone, and that's debatable.
I want to see us take Bradford because he has everything you want in a QB damn near.
Can make all the throws, intelligent, leader, hard working. Only questions he has that are reasonable is durability, which i spoke about in another thread. We don't see all the hits that Bradford takes during the season because he got up from them. all we see out of choice is the one hit that messed up his shoulder because thats the one he didn't get up from. The guy was 12 pounds lighter and fell directly on his shoulder in a perfect spot for it to get injured. Remember it also wasn't even his rotator cuff and no damage to that was suffered at any rate.
I think the Bradford durability thing has been blown out of proportion and that with the weight he's added and some additional components to our offensive line, he will be fine and should be the guy come April.
Taking Defensive Lineman year after year is not going to get it done. I realize every year there is new guys but Suh is not going to help our offense get any better next year.
The top QBs taken in the past 5 drafts werent the best guys available either (Alex Smith, Jay Cutler, Jmarc, Matt Ryan, Matthew Stafford), sometimes you just have to pull the plug if your positional need greatly outranks that of the BPA atm and the depth of the draft allows you to get a solid component later on.
I object to anyone, inc Bernie, saying at this moment in time that their choice is the only choice & everyone else is a coward or out of touch ignorant fool if they disagree or want more info.If he'd written the same article in favor of Suh, I'd feel the same. It is ridiculous & ridicule it, I did. It's not that simple & it will never be proven, one way or the other, that there ever was a single right choice;too many factors involved.
Bernie,imo, is the Emily Litella of Rams reportage & just the idea that he supports Bradford is almost enough to turn me off the guy. Miklasz writes the most reactionary crud he can think of quite often, imo, just to get readership/reaction.The rest of the time his opinions seem to be blown in the wind of general media opinion, not his own. It's cheap,lazy, & insults my intelligence. It certainly doesn't inform or enlighten me.
I think this "piling on" that takes place everytime Bernie writes an article is both over the top and in many cases ignorant. Yes, he like all writers prints articles which we find fault with. Sometimes his tone may bother us. But many times he makes valid points which are dismissed by people just for the sake of being argumentatative. Enough, already.
Bernie's assertion is simple: If the Rams feel Bradford grades out fine physically and feel he is the type of QB to lead a franchise, pick him. It is truly amazing how many people on this board and elsewhere seem to be armchair experts on whether or not Claussen, Bradford, McCoy, et. al. will be successful at the next level. They try to justify themselves by saying "well, I saw Bradford play against Texas or Baylor and he didn't show me much, blah, blah, blah." Truth be told, when it comes to these guys having future success, no one even remotely has a clue-myself included. This is what we hire football executives for- to make these judgments using every conceivable resource and judgment at their disposal. And if THEY screw up, well, then we call for their heads.
The assertion that Bernie "didn't provide enough facts" in his article to justify his position is ridiculous. He clearly stated numerous facts: that bradford was a high character guy. That he was tough. That he had the necessary size. That he scored high on the wonderlich. That he is versatile and a quick study. That NFL execs think highly of him. Don't really know what more you want short of him looking into a crystal ball or demonstrating clairvoyance.
The idea that "we wait till next year then get a QB is ridiculous on its face. Who the heck knows what position we'll have in the 2011 draft and who will be available at that spot? Again, the answer is "nobody knows".
Successful teams have QB's ranging from good to great. Manning. Roethlisberger, Brady, Rivers, Brees, McNabb, Romo, Eli Manning, etc. Relying on "hoping to find a guy in the later rounds"- as again Bernie pointed out, only to be dismissed- is foolhardy strategy. The Rams caught lightning in a bottle with Warner, as did New England with Brady.
As for the assertion someone made that "one doesn't need a great QB to win a Super Bowl"- well, if you exclude Trent Dilfer and Doug Williams and maybe one or two others, you'll find that 38 or 39 of the teams that won Super Bowls had QB's who ranged from good to great. And Dilfer was the beneficiary of an awesome Ravens defense while Williams had an excellent overall team around him- two qualities the Rams DO NOT have at this point.
I believe in balance and utilizing the running game effectively as many others do. But relying on Steven Jackson to save the day while we plug in some middling journeyman not only won't be successful it's gonna turn Steven Jackson into Earl Campbell within two years. And yet another glaring Rams need will pop up.
In sum, identify the guy you think has the capability of leading your franchise for the next ten years. If it's Bradford, take him. If it isn't, get Suh or whomever you feel is the best player available. The Rams need to take a chance. No, not a foolish chance based on a lack of due diligence- but a calculated chance on a guy leading this team back to respectability. And THAT was Bernie's point- which I feel was a very fair one.
Let's not turn every Bernie article into a joke post just because AV seems to have it in for the guy. His opinions are no worse then many other analyst and sometimes has valid points. He's simply being aggressive in saying the Rams should get Bradford if he seems to be the guy and take a reasonable chance if he is a few points behind Suh, which many here including myself have stated because it makes total sense, given our positional needs, the positions positional value, and the overall impact of the team should you get the best case scenario of either pick.
Regardless of whether you agree with me or not. A few things are facts.
Suh won't make our offense score more points. On paper, Defensive Line is deeper in this draft than Quarterback. Single good Defensive Lineman make less impact on a team then a single good quarterback (do i really have to give examples?). A good defensive lineman is easier to acquire then a good quarterback.
Do we want a promising rookie signal caller at Quarterback, our most important position, that may or may not have an impact? Or do we want another rookie defensive tackle for our rotation, one of our lesser important positions, that may or may not have an impact. We need a defensive end more than a defensive tackle imo.
If Bradford grades out around Suh, then he doesn't HAVE to be the pick, but IMO he is the wiser choice not only for next year but for years to come. You don't bank on picking high in a subsequent draft to pick a quarterback that may or may not be at your pick, may or may not be a good choice, may or may not even be healthy. That's how you get fired...especially seeing as your coaching staff is in all likely hood playing for their job.
I'm not asking for Bernie to "look into the crystal ball" here. I'm asking him to not judge Bradford based on how his predecessors have performed, because that has nothing to do with Bradford. I'm stating that a much better article would have been one describing why BRADFORD should be the first pick in the draft, not why a QUARTERBACK is a good choice to take with the first pick.
And it isn't because I have a vendetta against Bernie, and it isn't because I want us to pick Suh. I agree that Bradford should be our pick right now, but not because of the way Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco and Mark Sanchez have played so far. It's because to me, Bradford appears to possess the intangibles to be successful in the NFL. And that's my opinion.