Results 1 to 6 of 6
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By AvengerRam

Thread: "Rams donít intend to extend Bradfordís deal"

  1. #1
    RealRam's Avatar
    RealRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    8,407
    Rep Power
    68

    "Rams donít intend to extend Bradfordís deal"

    Report / Rumor

    Report: Rams don’t intend to extend Bradford’s deal

    Posted by Mike Florio
    NBC Sports / PFT
    Feb. 17, 2014
    6:03 PM EST


    The Rams would like to extend the contract of quarterback Sam Bradford. Unless they don’t. Unless they presently have no intention to do so but may do so in the future.

    It’s all become sort of confusing.

    The latest report comes from Jason La Canfora of CBS Sports, who says that the Rams “have absolutely no intention” to extend Bradford’s contract. His claim that the new report is “contrary to a midseason report” strongly implies that, even then, the Rams didn’t want to extend Bradford’s contract.

    And that’s where it gets weird. La Canfora isn’t simply throwing high and tight at Adam Schefter, Jay Glazer, or Ian Rapoport; there was no “report” that the Rams want to extend Bradford’s contract. Rams COO Kevin Demoff said so.

    Specifically, Demoff said, “We’ve decided Bradford is our guy. If they wanted to do a contract extension, we would do it.”

    We reported in response to Demoff’s declaration that there currently are no talks. It appeared that the Rams were interested in buying low, before Bradford possibly made a big push in the final two-plus years of his rookie deal. A subsequent torn ACL has complicated things, and perhaps the Rams have since decided to take a wait-and-see approach with Bradford.

    But then there’s the “contract to a midseason report” knife twist, which means that, according to La Canfora, the Rams didn’t want to extend Bradford when Demoff publicly said they did.

    The question of whether the Rams want to extend Bradford glosses over the question of whether he has done enough from 2010 through 2013 to merit a salary of $14 million and a cap number of $17.6 million in 2014 and/or a salary of $12.9 million and a cap number of $16.5 million in 2015. That’s a huge investment for a guy with a career record of 20-28-1 and a career passer rating of 79.3.

    But then there’s the question that every team with a good-but-not-great quarterback must consider. If you release the bird in the hand, you may up with a turd in the bush.

    UPDATE 6:14 p.m. ET: And now it gets even more confusing. La Canfora has done a 180, adjusting his report to say that the “Rams are open to an extension” with Bradford. That still conflicts with Demoff’s saying that if Bradford wanted to extend the contract, the Rams would.


  2. #2
    RealRam's Avatar
    RealRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    8,407
    Rep Power
    68

    Re: "Rams donít intend to extend Bradfordís deal"

    Old news / old rumors / old nonsense?

    Sam Bradford Rumors: Latest Buzz Surrounding QB's Future with Rams
    By Matt Fitzgerald, Featured Columnist
    BleacherReport / NFL
    Feb 17, 2014

    [Excerpt]

    Releasing a player of Bradford's potential before he's had a strong enough supporting cast to play at an elite level would be a risk. The team has been patient with him all this time with bad OLs, underwhelming receiving targets and new systems.

    Considering the Rams have the Nos. 2 and 13 overall selections in the upcoming draft, offensive improvements can be had. If the Rams have a strong 2014 draft, perhaps Bradford will play at a higher level than ever before.

    Kellen Clemens served as a decent fill-in for Bradford this past season, but he's not the long-term answer.

    In the increasingly tough NFC West division, there is a clear sense of urgency within the Rams organization to build a competitive team despite the inherent youth on the roster. Whether it's Bradford, a top 2015 draft prospect or someone else, though, St. Louis won't be a viable contender until its quarterback situation is resolved.

    ==============================

    Will Rams extend Sam Bradford’s deal?
    BY CHRIS BURKE / SI.COM NFL
    NFC SOUTH, ST. LOUIS RAMS
    POSTED FEBRUARY 17, 2014

    [Excerpt]

    Simply cutting Bradford would leave $7.2 million in dead money on the Rams’ books spread over the next two seasons, but it would save them more than $10.4 million this season.

    To boil this all down to its simplest form: Is it better to keep Bradford and try to add some more talent around him with the extra first-round pick; or to move on from Bradford, replace him with one of the draft’s top QBs and put that extra spending money toward bulking up the roster elsewhere?

    Bradford’s performance last season could push the Rams toward door No. 1. In six-plus games prior to his injury, Bradford threw 14 touchdowns to just four interceptions, with a 60.7 completion percentage and 90.9 QB rating. That final number was the 11th-best in the league last season, just behind San Francisco’s Colin Kaepernick and ahead of Cam Newton, Tom Brady, Andrew Luck and others.

    Of course, Kaepernick’s performance — not to mention that of recent Super Bowl winner Russell Wilson — might help make the argument against keeping Bradford. Both the 49rs and Seahawks have been able to stockpile talent throughout the roster in part because of the bargain-basement prices their quarterbacks have been carrying. Though those salaries will skyrocket in the near future, the benefit of turning down that path is obvious.

    The Bradford conundrum is the main reason the Rams are such an unknown variable in the 2014 draft. They could use the No. 2 overall pick on a quarterback, receiver, offensive tackle or Jadeveon Clowney, plus are in prime position to trade down should they decide to stick it out with Bradford.
    Last edited by RealRam; -02-18-2014 at 11:04 AM. Reason: SI.com

  3. #3
    RealRam's Avatar
    RealRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    8,407
    Rep Power
    68

    Re: "Rams donít intend to extend Bradfordís deal"

    Do the St. Louis Rams want to extend
    Sam Bradford's contract or not?

    By Ryan Van Bibber
    Feb 17 2014, 4:40p

    Not even the insiders know what the Rams want to do with their quarterback.


    The St. Louis Rams were talking openly about their willingness to sign quarterback Sam Bradford to a contract extension early last season. Bradford tore his ACL in Week 7 against the Carolina Panthers, and the contract extension talk disappeared, understandably so. Almost five months later, Bradford contract talk is bubbling up again ... kind of.

    CBS Sports' Jason LaCanfora ran a report Monday morning that the Rams "have no intention of extending" Bradford's current contract, the $76 million deal he signed as the first overall pick in the 2010 NFL Draft. Here's the exact quote from LaCanfora's report, screencapped here because it's since changed (more on that in a minute).

    Another NFL insider, Ian Rapoport, filed the midseason report LaCanfora said was no longer valid.


    Somewhere during the course of the day, LaCanfora's article at CBS Sports changed. It now reads:

    A source says the Rams are open to an extension for QB Sam Bradford, who is due $27M over the next two years. A longer deal would still be a surprise to many, because adding guaranteed money beyond the current deal would make it cumbersome for the team to part with Bradford.
    It's the same article, with the same URL, that went up early Monday morning. The timestamp didn't change. There were no notes added to reflect the edit. It just kind of happened.

    The case of the mysterious edit!!!!!

    As an editor, I hate it when that happens. In fact, it's not good practice to let that happen. That wasn't a misspelled name or some other typo. It was a fundamental change to a piece of reporting that was discussed publicly on Twitter and elsewhere. Readers are owed an explanation for what changed.

    So what did change? Who knows! LaCanfora and Rapoport are both well-connected NFL media mavens for their respective outlets. Unlike a certain local deejay with a cartoon mustache, they can legitimately use the term "insider" (as lame as that is) to describe their particular style of reporting.

    What I think happened was what usually happens this time of year, one source told LaCanfora one thing, another one, probably one closer to the situation, probably said something else, something more vague ...

    ... because that's what sources say this time of year, especially the ubiquitous "team sources," who are sometimes the very same as those nefarious "league sources."

    Agents, front offices, anonymous sources all tiptoe around whatever which way they're leaning at the moment. They have to, as much as it may frustrate rubbernecking fans. Things are very fluid this with cap deadlines, free agency and the draft just over the horizon.

    Appropriately enough, this is happening on the same day the NFL's "official slander courier" released his regurgitated, context-free player assessments about some terrible twentysomethings. Anonymous information gets doled out strategically placed scoop at a time because someone wants it out there for a reason.

    The Rams may be willing to extend Bradford right now. It would lower his substantial cap hit ($17 million), but spread the money out over an extended commitment ... less than a year after tearing his ACL and nowhere near the ceiling he had as a prospect in 2010. That could mean the Rams getting him at a much cheaper rate than they would if he returns healthy in 2014 and plays his way into an even bigger contract, which would give Bradford's camp some incentive to wait on a new deal.

    It's a tough situation to read because there are plenty of moving parts and no shortage of competing motivations. It's quite possible that LaCanfora AND Rapoport are correct...

    for now.

  4. #4
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,689
    Rep Power
    168

    Re: "Rams donít intend to extend Bradfordís deal"

    Okay... let's review.

    Yesterday, Jason "Make Stuff up and Hope it Comes True" La Canfora "reported" in the morning that the Rams would not extend Bradford.

    The "report" was repeated throughout the blog and Twitter world.

    A few hours later, La Canfora revised the "report" to read that the Rams are open to extending Bradford (which we've known for months since Snead said so in an interview).

    Despite this, Mike "I still think Terry Bradshaw might be dead" Florio put an article up on PFT with an erroneous headline based upon La Canfora's original "report" (despite his acknowledgement that the "report" had changed).

    As this was already addressed in another thread, and I'd rather ClanRam be part of the solution than part of the problem...

    Thread closed.

  5. #5
    laram0's Avatar
    laram0 is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    57
    Posts
    9,241
    Rep Power
    108

    Re: "Rams donít intend to extend Bradfordís deal"

    To me this is all premature....Let's wait and see how Bradford does in 2014.

  6. #6
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,689
    Rep Power
    168

    Re: "Rams donít intend to extend Bradfordís deal"

    Just one last update:

    This just was posted on Roto "We Play Fantasy Football So We Know The Game" World:
    Coach Jeff Fisher reiterated that Sam Bradford is "our quarterback."
    "He’s our quarterback, and we’ve said that," Fisher said. "We talk about extensions with all our players under contract. Whether or not we do so with him, I don’t know where all this came from, but Sam’s our quarterback. He’s going to be under center." This all comes on the heels of a CBS Sports report Monday that originally stated the Rams had "absolutely no intention" of extending Bradford before the report was changed to say the Rams are "open to an extension." Now just because Fisher keeps insisting Bradford will be the starter in 2014 doesn't mean we have to take that at face value. Fisher has turned on his words in the past. The Rams would be wise to look long and hard at this year's quarterback draft prospects. Bradford is arguably the most overpaid player in the league.
    This is a great example of the backwards world that the internet has become.

    La Canfora's "report," which cites no source, it taken as fact.

    Jeff Fisher's statement, which comes from the ultimate source, is portrayed as a potential lie.

    RIP Journalism
    KoaKoi likes this.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 19
    Last Post: -11-11-2013, 12:25 PM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: -11-20-2012, 08:20 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: -11-14-2005, 06:31 AM
  4. I donít buy this "no talent" thing
    By elAcky in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: -12-04-2004, 06:43 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •