Sam Bradford could have landed Rams high draft pick/NFL.com

[AvengerRam]

You can say the same for Adrian Petersen this time last year, just sayin'.

Its that kind of "logic" that keeps the lottery in business.

[sosa39rams]

If I had the choice between Sam and RG3, I'd take RG3 all day everyday. But Fisher and Snead would have been foolish to maybe get 1 first rounder for an improving Sam to take a un-known commodity who had torn his ACL in college (RG3).

[ramsanddodgers]

What next, a thread telling us how the Rams should lose more games in order to get a higher draft pick?

[Rammed]

Who knows what the future holds, but as of today, RG3 is a far better bargain at 20 million than Bradford at 70 plus.

How is it possible to even compare, last year of the CBA and a new system. Make it apples and apples, last year RGIII would have had a bigger contract at #2 than Bradford had at #1

[gap]

I could have recently won $217 mil if I would have been the only one to pick the right powerball numbers.


gap

[Fortuninerhater]

How is it possible to even compare, last year of the CBA and a new system. Make it apples and apples, last year RGIII would have had a bigger contract at #2 than Bradford had at #1

Yeah and maybe I should compare their accomplishments on the field as well.

Sam Bradford 21 tds 13ints 3,702yards 6.7 yards per attempt 59.5 completion % 82.6 pass rating

RG3 20 tds 5ints 3,200yards 8.1 yards per attempt 65.6 completion % 102.4 pass rating


Obviously it'd be senseless to compare their rushing stats, but I'd be doing my arguement a disservice if I didn't, so here goes.


Sam Bradford 37 attempts 127 yards 3.4 avg 1 td

RG3 120 attempts 815 yards 6.8 avg 7 tds

Sam Bradford played all 16 regular season games, RG3 played 15 or else the desparity would likely be even greater.

RG3 was named rookie of the year and lead his team to the playoffs. Sam has been close twice, but has yet to put his team over the top.

In summary, even a third grader can see there's really no comparison in their individual seasons. RG3 clearly had a better year and that's with Sam argueably having his best year to date.

So say what you want, but there's not a sensible person anywhere who can make a legitimate case that Bradford at 70 plus million is a better bargain than RG3 at 20.

In fact, most football experts would tell you that RG3 is a better bargain if they had the same salary.

And for those concerned about injuries, lest you forget it took Sam Bradford a good 6 months to recover from a high ankle sprain.

[Fortuninerhater]

Its that kind of "logic" that keeps the lottery in business.

And I haven't heard any rumblings of the lottery going anywhere anytime soon, have you?

[AvengerRam]

And I haven't heard any rumblings of the lottery going anywhere anytime soon, have you?

You are so clueless. If you didn't get my point, you should have said so and I would have explained it to you.

Enjoy your regrets. I'll enjoy the future.

[Fortuninerhater]

You are so clueless. If you didn't get my point, you should have said so and I would have explained it to you.

Enjoy your regrets. I'll enjoy the future.

Obviously you are the one who is clueless. If you didn't get my point, I certainly am more than happy to explain it to you.

And by the way, don't you still have several months to go before you get enthralled in a Sam Bradford discussion?

You kill me.....lol

[AvengerRam]

Obviously you are the one who is clueless. If you didn't get my point, I certainly am more than happy to explain it to you.

And by the way, don't you still have several months to go before you get enthralled in a Sam Bradford discussion?

You kill me.....lol

I'm not discussing Sam... no matter how hard Negative Nancys like you try to bait me. Though, I must say, you seem to be a master baiter.

[Rammed]

Yeah and maybe I should compare their accomplishments on the field as well.

Sam Bradford 21 tds 13ints 3,702yards 6.7 yards per attempt 59.5 completion % 82.6 pass rating

RG3 20 tds 5ints 3,200yards 8.1 yards per attempt 65.6 completion % 102.4 pass rating


Obviously it'd be senseless to compare their rushing stats, but I'd be doing my arguement a disservice if I didn't, so here goes.


Sam Bradford 37 attempts 127 yards 3.4 avg 1 td

RG3 120 attempts 815 yards 6.8 avg 7 tds

Sam Bradford played all 16 regular season games, RG3 played 15 or else the desparity would likely be even greater.

RG3 was named rookie of the year and lead his team to the playoffs. Sam has been close twice, but has yet to put his team over the top.

In summary, even a third grader can see there's really no comparison in their individual seasons. RG3 clearly had a better year and that's with Sam argueably having his best year to date.

So say what you want, but there's not a sensible person anywhere who can make a legitimate case that Bradford at 70 plus million is a better bargain than RG3 at 20.

In fact, most football experts would tell you that RG3 is a better bargain if they had the same salary.

And for those concerned about injuries, lest you forget it took Sam Bradford a good 6 months to recover from a high ankle sprain.

Completely ignoring and missing my point and I get the feeling reading the rest of your posts that's on purpose. If not well no words for that.

[Fortuninerhater]

I'm not discussing Sam... no matter how hard Negative Nancys like you try to bait me. Though, I must say, you seem to be a master baiter.

Then perhaps you're off topic, either way I'm finding it hard to understand why you're even on this thread.

Last I heard from you, you were taking your ball and going home if anybody wanted to discuss Sam.

[AvengerRam]

Then perhaps you're off topic, either way I'm finding it hard to understand why you're even on this thread.

Last I heard from you, you were taking your ball and going home if anybody wanted to discuss Sam.

And I have not discussed Sam here. I've discussed the absurd "source" behind this "report" and I've discussed RG3's injury.

Its funny, though... while you wonder why I'm on this thread, I wonder why you're on this website.

[Fortuninerhater]

Completely ignoring and missing my point and I get the feeling reading the rest of your posts that's on purpose. If not well no words for that.

The point of my post was to point out to the homers, apologists, and/or the uninformed on this board that the Rams could've been just as well off (and maybe even better off) with a Sam Bradford trade as we are having basically traded the rights to RG3. I would've been happy either way.

Your point really is moot, because it was not the case and will never be the case.

[Fortuninerhater]

And I have not discussed Sam here. I've discussed the absurd "source" behind this "report" and I've discussed RG3's injury.

Its funny, though... while you wonder why I'm on this thread, I wonder why you're on this website.

Basically because it's my prerogative. Would you like me to leave Avenger?