Please read that last line out loud twice. And imagine the fun I had with the buckload of irony that's in there. Thanks it's been fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater
Printable View
Please read that last line out loud twice. And imagine the fun I had with the buckload of irony that's in there. Thanks it's been fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater
Difference is, the Rams had a choice to make between RG3 and Sam Bradford prior to last year's draft.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammed
Their salaries were already determined.
Bradford did another thing that has gone unmentioned: he got Jeff Fisher to come here. Had Fisher not felt Bradford had the necessary skill set to be a future playoff QB, he never would have come here. Few would argue Fisher's arrival was a godsend. Furthermore, giving up on a guy in whom you've invested heavily after 2-3 years is simply not sound business, unless the guy is so horrendous he gives you no choice. Such is certainly not the case with Bradford.
As I've mentioned numerous times before, Bradford will improve as his surrounding cast (wide receivers/o-linemen) improves. 2012 illustrated that. He had decent numbers despite not really having a healthy Amendola or any guy who could ever be confused for a number one wideout. I am very encouraged with what the future holds for both our team and Bradford.
RGIII gives reason for concern given his body type and the high risk approach he takes to the position. And I for one am also NOT the least bit convinced the RGIIIs and the Kaepernicks are the future of the QB position. It has always- with few exceptions-been a drop back, pocket passing league. And given the increased size and speed of the defenses and the importance of keeping the QB healthy in today's game, I don't see it changing much anytime soon.
Be happy. Good times lie ahead.
If you're asking me whether I would endeavor to compel your departure, the answer is no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater
If you're asking whether I'd miss you and you're constant whining and revisionism, the answer, again, is no.
It's not their salaries that is at issue. We all know that very few players with record setting contracts see all of their salaries. What forced the RAMS' hands was that trading Sam would have prvented us from signing anyone outside of our draft picks, and may have prevented us from sigining all of them. I don't remember how much of Sam's bonuses would have come crashing down on the 2012 salary cap, but it was huge. It was not economically feasable to trade Sam.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater
Given the cap implications, it still would have been a bad idea due to the style of play of RGmememe. He wouldn't have started 15 games behind our OL; which would have been weaker without the few FA pickups we had in 2012 (no cap money to sign them). Also, and this cannot be proven to those that need to see it happen, and then will only believe it if it is shown by the teleprompter, the RAMS OL would have been called for OL Holding about 200% more than the Skins were. The RAMS cannot get away with constant blatant OL holding that other teams with scrambling QBs seem to get away with.
basically, Sam vs RGmememe is moot because there was no way for RGmememe to replace Sam in St. louis.
gap
Let's not forget what we did with the extra pick we received in the Washington trade (Jenkins) and what players can come out of our extra two first rounders coming up. If the offers were presented to me at that time(or in hindsight) I would still take Bradford + 6th overall + 2013 and 2014 first rounders + 2nd Rounder over RG3 + 4th overall.
Bottom line: a healthy RGIII at 20 mil is a better value than a healthy Sam Bradford at 78 million, and anyone who disagrees doesn't watch much football, does'nt understand the salary cap, or is blind in their loyalty to Bradford. I love Sam Bradford, and I believe that with the right pieces around him (good OL, WR's, and TE's) he could be a top-8 QB, but his huge contract seriously affects the salary cap and reduces our chances to bring in talent via free agency, On the other hand, RGIII is modestly paid compared to Sam, and his athleticism and running ability allow him to not rely on having good OL or receivers; he could always escape the pocket when the line breaks down and his scrambling gives his receivers more time to get open. So does this mean that the Rams made the wrong choice? Not necessarily; running QB's tend to have shorter careers than pocket passers, and with RGIII being so small in stature, he's at an even higher risk of getting injured. Also, the Rams received two additional 1st round picks when they traded down with Washington, and a 2nd rounder that eventually became Janoris Jenkins. So you gotta ask yourself: is RGIII and a early 1st rounder better than Sam Bradford, Janoris Jenkis, and two future 1st rounders... I think not. I honestly believe that this is the year that Sam earns his paycheck, and with some better talent around him (either through FA or the draft) I think he's going to put up Pro Bowl numbers. Now if were talking about value, I hate to say it but I'd take Russell Wilson at 520,000 over either one of them, maybe even over anyone in the NFL.
Me thinks you'd miss the hell out of me either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by AvengerRam
But for the record, my constant whining and revisionism is every bit as valid as your @$$ kissing.
Could not've said it better myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinnie25
Don't kid yourself, no name. Nobody here would miss you for a minute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater
A master baiter you don't say?Quote:
Originally Posted by AvengerRam
You're right, that first minute would be filled with reflection. And then the missing kicks in.Quote:
Originally Posted by AvengerRam
"DON'T MAKE ME PULL THIS CAR OVER, YOU TWO!!!" :mad:
But that is nothing more than an academic exercise. You can't move from that statement into anything tangible, for all the reasons that Gap mentioned a few posts ago. 1) trading Bradford would have screwed up the salary cap. 2) RG3 would have taken more hits behind this line, and as it is, his own line has him off his feet for the next few months. 3) It's not a matter of Sam or RG3. It's a matter of Sam/Brockers/Jenkins/Pead/Rok/2013-#22/2014-1st rounder or RG3.Quote:
Bottom line: a healthy RGIII at 20 mil is a better value than a healthy Sam Bradford at 78 million, and anyone who disagrees doesn't watch much football, does'nt understand the salary cap, or is blind in their loyalty to Bradford.
It's fine to say the 2012 RG3 at $20 million is a better value than the 2012 Sam at $78 million. But it is not germane to the discussion, and misleading to use it as any comparison to point to what the Rams should have done in the 2012 draft.
This thread is how you can tell it's the offseason.