Printable View
WHAT IF... we had drafted Suh.. then colt mccoy in the 2nd.. do you think we would have been a better team? because me and my friends had a arguement and me defending bradford. My point was that, Bradford was the best thing that can ever happen to any organziation.
their point.. Colt Mccoy is the REAL DEAL and SUH is the real deal....
So let me hear your guys thoughts!
Since when is McCoy the real deal?
thats what im saying... im not sayin he sucks but he's decent as of now.. but Bradford is the truth.
Colt McCoy is notches below Bradford. Suh is coming along, but you can't build a team around them. Bradford was the right choice in building for the future. Having Colt and Suh would not have had paid immediate dividends like Bradford. Bradford is the type of player that makes others around him better, Suh and Colt don't have that ability.
i`m glad we got Bradford + Saffold, who himself is playing at a level you`d only expect from a top 10 pick,as a rookie.
Suh is having a great year..Colt has looked decent in the few games he`s played so far.
Bradford and Saffold are both having great years....even if we could turn back to April with what we know now..i`d still take what we got.
i`m sure a fair few of the guys who were campaigning for Suh, now that they have seen what Bradford has done e.g picked up an NFL Offense and played like a good quality seasoned vet,took some licks and not re-injured his shoulder etc...wouldn`t want Suh now..despite his high level of play.
Bradford + Saffold > Suh + Colt McCoy
The fact that you could cherry-pick any other 2 draft picks that were available and it's still a 'no' speaks volumes about how great Bradford and Saffold have been. And keep in mind that we most likely wouldn't have picked McCoy, we probably would have picked Clausen ahead of McCoy anyway.
And McCoy has had a few good games, but let's not get ahead of ourselves here...
Colt's done a nice job in his five starts (winning 2), but his role has been very different from Sam's.
McCoy has averaged only 25.4 pass attempts per game, as Cleveland is a run-first team. This has allowed him to maintain a high completion percentage. Bradford, on the other hand, has thrown 37.5 passes per game, so his percentage is a bit lower. However, Bradford has thrown for more yards (224.5 to 195.0 per game) and TDs (1.54 to .60 per game).
In the two games McCoy won, the team averaged 129.5 yards passing, and 177.5 yards rushing. What this tells you is that McCoy can do well in a run-first offense that does not rely too heavily on him. When he has to throw the ball more often, the success rate goes down significantly.
I think most would agree that Bradford has a superior upside.
So, would I rather have McCoy + Suh over Bradford + Murphy?
No way.
Bradford can be an elite QB, and elite QBs win. QBs like McCoy are fine, but they don't typically carry teams to championships.
As nicely Colt McCoy has come in to help the Browns, he's nowhere near the level of Bradford, and I was very much a Suh/McCoy guy in the spring.
Suh is the real deal and very much worth the 2nd overall pick, but it's really not our run defense that's lacking(13th), but our pass defense(21st). Suh can get after the QB, and would do a good job pairing with Long, but he's not going to throw TD's.
Enter McCoy. Arguably, he has a better offense than Bradford, with Peyton Hillis running over teams, and a better receiving corps with (Cleveland Chainsaw) Massaquoi and Cribbs. He has a very good rating(85.3 over Bradford's 82.0), but only 3 TD's to 3 Int's and less than 1000 yards. Going to his wins/losses, he's 2-3, with the wins being blowouts against NO and NE, where the defense and running game did the damage, not McCoy. He did not throw a TD in either of his wins, and was a total 23 of 35 for 248 yards in those two games. Obviously not carrying the team.
Meanwhile, Bradford IS the offense for St. Louis, and is looking more like Manning making his receivers much better than they are then he is a rookie. He threw two TD's to Bajema yesterday, the guy who was brought in for his blocking(they were Billy's first two TD's in his career). Bradford is a steal as the first overall pick, and I would easily take him over any other two players in this draft.
Bradford is worth 3 Suh's and McCoy. Bradford is going to be a true superstar at the QB position. These type of players are rare. Suh is going to be a superstar also, but cant influence the game half as much as Sam will.
Sam remind's me of Tom Brady, only he's stronger,taller, and a better athlete. Lets hope he is just as tough as Brady
Suh and McCoy? No way.
Suh and Clausen? No way.
Bradford and Saffold? No w... I mean, that was the best choice for this team. :D
Before Sam's Pro Day I was all about the Suh/ McCoy combo.
Glad I'm not the GM.
Bradford has elite top 2 QB potential- ie Manning and Brady
McCoy has Marc Bulger, Jake Delhome, Chad Pennington, and Matt Hasselbeck potential.
McCoy may have good regular seasons, maybe even Pro Bowl seasons, but I don't see him as a "championship" QB, unlike Sam Bradford.
And as for Suh, yeah the kid is a beast, probably will be the best DT of his time, but so was Warren Sapp, and he has only won one Super Bowl. Brady has won 2 legitimately.
McCoy's emergence coincided a bit with Hillis deciding to run over everyone like a bulldozer over bushes. Although he has performed well, the Browns have kept things super simple with him. They limit his throws, don't let him go downfield much, and use Hillis to take the pressure off of him.
McCoy is a gamer, much more so than a guy like Clausen. He knows how to, and wants to, fight for every inch on that field. That will make him a good QB in the league. However he will be much more dependent on a strong supporting cast than Bradford, at least in my opinion. I'll take Bradford over Suh/McCoy as Bradford is too much better, and QB too important to downgrade for a top-tier DT. Adding Saffold on top of that is just icing on the cake. No doubt we made the better choice, at least in the short term.
Also, did you know Suh's deal will most likely pay him more than Bradford? As a DT at the #2? This is accomplished by signing a shorter term deal, which will give him a new bonus and contract in Bradford's last year essentially making sure he is paid more. Would you REALLY want to pay Suh more than Bradford? I wouldn't, even if he is a great DT.
It's really impossible to say definitely since it's a hypothetical situation, but I think it's hard to argue against the decision the Rams made. I don't know that anyone, even his advocates, thought Bradford would be as good out of the gate as he has been. Since he plays the most important position on the team, I think it's pretty clear that the Rams made the right choice, and I say that as someone who wanted Suh.
While Suh would have improved the defense - he clearly would have been a major upgrade next to Robbins, and I hope we can admit his presence would have had an impact on the rest of the line and defense as a whole - McCoy, good as he's looked at times, would have been a downgrade at QB because Bradford has simply been outstanding overall.
Of 11 games, do the Rams still win five or more with a downgrade at QB but an upgrade on the DL? Probably not. But with hypothetical questions like these, though who can really say for sure? Bradford's name has been mentioned in this thread along with Brady, but let's not forget Brady was a sixth round pick. McCoy could very well develop into an effective upper tier quarterback, especially if he's playing in a scheme that plays to his strengths.
While I agree with the conclusions so far that the Rams made the right call, I have to disagree with some of the comments that accompany them. Saying Suh doesn't have the ability to make those around him better, that McCoy has more offensive talent around him in Cleveland, or that Suh is going to make more as a DT than Bradford will as a QB all seem off-base to me. But I'll leave it at that so we don't stray off topic here.
yeahh... thats the thing i argued my valid points.... all i said is.. look who has the better record and has the best chance to reach the playoffs :)
Actually all I did was point out that Suh's deal is one year shorter than Bradford's, allowing him to (potentially) make more money in the same amount of years as Bradford will because he will get a new deal, taking into account a new signing bonus and base salary. Not that he will, but he potentially will. I guess my point was, would we have really been happy paying a DT the same kind of salary that is paid to high-end QBs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick
Bradford has certainly been earning his money, and so has Suh. But we seem to have a lot more bang for out buck with Bradford based upon his position, and our win total.