Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16
  1. #1
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,689
    Rep Power
    168

    Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Here are two recent comments regarding the Rams' ability to sign Sam Bradford if they draft him in Round 1:

    First, Statement #1:
    Bradford’s contract strategy already is the topic of brewing of speculation in NFL circles. There’s chatter that Bradford will refuse to sign a deal with the Rams before the draft. If Bradford doesn’t sign in advance, he gains leverage — because the Rams would be under the gun to get their franchise QB into a routine as soon as possible to maximize his rookie-year development. If Bradford held out a long time — even as far as holding out from training camp — it would be a public-relations nightmare for the Rams.
    Kind of a scary prospect, huh? Makes you wonder whether the Rams should take Bradford, doesn't it?

    Now here's Statement #1:
    Again, much overreaction over very little. The Rams are prepared to pay what it takes to sign Bradford. If his agents want to play a little game, good for them. But he'll get signed. The agent gains leverage if Bradford waits until after the draft to talk contract.
    Well, that one isn't too bad, is it? Sounds like this commentator is aware of the possible bargaining tactics, but isn't too worried about it impacting the Rams' ability to select and sign Bradford.

    These two statements were published within hours of each other.

    So... who is the author of Statement #1?

    Bernie Miklasz.

    And... who is the author of Statement #2?

    Bernie Miklasz.

    WHAT!??!?!? How could this be? How could the same person publish a nightmare scenario in one article, then post on his message board that the Rams aren't worried about such scenarios??????

    Could it be that he (along with several other writers from tabloid sites like PFT and from wishful-thinking Washington sportswriters) is just trying to stir up some controversy to keep interest up in the three weeks remaining before the draft?

    Who cares about honesty, real sources, or reasoned analysis. Just throw a bunch of crap against the wall and see if it sticks.

    If the Rams don't take Bradford (and I'd say its about a 95% chance that they will), it will be either because they get a "can't refuse" trade offer or because something happens to call Bradford's health into question. They're not going to pass on the guy because they're worried that his agent will try to get top dollar. That is entirely expected.


  2. #2
    Varg6's Avatar
    Varg6 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,620
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    I agree with everything you said Av, but you know me, I worry about every little thing. It just pains me to see speculation like this for the Rams. It seems like it's never smooth-sailing for us, there's always drama and it stresses us fans out. I know that there is more than likely little to no merit with half of these articles but it does make one wonder...

    I'm not going to say, "Well, if Bradford or his agent aren't commenting on this it obviously isn't true." but at the same time I'm not going to believe everything I read...

    As a fan you can't help but be excited to think perhaps we have our QB of the Future and I'd just like to not have so much other crap attached to it.


    Always and Forever a fan of the St. Louis Rams

  3. #3
    rams_man13 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    162
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    I don't see why Bradford wouldn't sign a deal with the Rams. We'll probably offer him an 80 million dollar, 6 year deal with 45 million guaranteed. This is probably the last year he'll get that kind of money as I expect a rookie pay-scale to come in. He'd be stupid to hold out and re-enter the draft next year because not only will he be picked later, he'll also make much less money. He also doesn't seem like the type and he and Spags have met a couple times and seem to get along pretty well (Spags was the first NFL rep to congratulate Bradford after his workout). Also, in all the interviews, Bradford talks about how he'd fit in well for the Rams.

    I'm not worried, I think Bradford and the Rams will have an agreement in place before his workout and it will get signed after the private workout, 3 days before the draft. They'll negotiate with Suh, and take calls for the pick just in case, but I don't expect this to be a problem.

  4. #4
    01d 0rd3r's Avatar
    01d 0rd3r is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    1,259
    Rep Power
    28

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    So... who is the author of Statement #1?

    Bernie Miklasz.

    And... who is the author of Statement #2?

    Bernie Miklasz.

    WHAT!??!?!?
    You dont know how hard im laughing right now. People at the library are starring at me.

  5. #5
    ludairv's Avatar
    ludairv is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    277
    Rep Power
    6

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    the more i read about washington and shanahans expertise...the more i worrty that maybe he is a better fit there but i doubt the rams will let it slide

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

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    The "better fit" stuff is speculation as well.

    How about this one...

    Would Bradford, who is part Cherokee, want to play for the "Redskins"???

    Oooooooooh.... intriguing!

    Or not.

  7. #7
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,612
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    The "better fit" stuff is speculation as well.

    How about this one...

    Would Bradford, who is part Cherokee, want to play for the "Redskins"???

    Oooooooooh.... intriguing!

    Or not.
    Well, we can certainly rule out the Cowboys then. And I bet he can't wait to get a shot at Buffalo; he'll kill 'em!
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  8. #8
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,689
    Rep Power
    168

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Or... maybe Bradford is worried that he'll get sacked more in St. Louis. After all, the Rams must have given up more sacks than the Redskins last year, right?

    Wrong.

    Rams: 44 sacks allowed in 583 pass attempts.

    Redskins: 46 sacks allowed in 579 pass attempts.

  9. #9
    ludairv's Avatar
    ludairv is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    277
    Rep Power
    6

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Or... maybe Bradford is worried that he'll get sacked more in St. Louis. After all, the Rams must have given up more sacks than the Redskins last year, right?

    Wrong.

    Rams: 44 sacks allowed in 583 pass attempts.

    Redskins: 46 sacks allowed in 579 pass attempts.
    lmao man i love u modulators...keep this board grounded....man these rumors are hectic!.... i just hope this damn ownership thing plays out well and soon....gawd i hate Adam Shefter

  10. #10
    clarasDK is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Denmark
    Age
    39
    Posts
    450
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Very nice thread

    Avenger your on a roll today

  11. #11
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    40

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by ludairv View Post
    lmao man i love u modulators...keep this board grounded....man these rumors are hectic!.... i just hope this damn ownership thing plays out well and soon....gawd i hate Adam Shefter
    You know, Schefter did say we were taking your boy Bradford back a couple of months ago.

    EDIT-and I would like to know if we do have a "no we're not going above this" salary number on the first round pick. If Bradford insists on $85-$90 million and there is no price ceiling, well....hopefully there isn't a salary cap any time soon.

    /Personally, I'd get firm numbers from both Suh and McCoy and tell Bradford, "we're paying you in the vicinity of this."
    Last edited by PeoriaRam; -03-30-2010 at 05:21 PM.

  12. #12
    ludairv's Avatar
    ludairv is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    277
    Rep Power
    6

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by PeoriaRam View Post
    You know, Schefter did say we were taking your boy Bradford back a couple of months ago.
    ya and apparently everyone else is now....: S guess he lucked out? lol

  13. #13
    Bralidore(RAMMODE)'s Avatar
    Bralidore(RAMMODE) is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,149
    Rep Power
    22

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    I can also be a rebel and say in 20 years I'll still be alive and wearing a hat, if im right, if anyone remembered me saying it, it'd be at least weird or thought provoking. if im wrong, who cares?

    Schefter just heard from Devaney that the Rams were very interested in Bradford from some guy in the Rams camp. Seems to have got it right, yay....

    AV beat me to the sack number but Redskins had most of their starters the entire season including Campbell. We tallied a ridiculous amount of sacks in a few games including 8 in one game because our line was utterly depleted..

    Kind of says alot when their guy still gets sacked more than ours.

  14. #14
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    40

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bralidore(RAMMODE) View Post
    I can also be a rebel and say in 20 years I'll still be alive and wearing a hat, if im right, if anyone remembered me saying it, it'd be at least weird or thought provoking. if im wrong, who cares?

    Schefter just heard from Devaney that the Rams were very interested in Bradford from some guy in the Rams camp. Seems to have got it right, yay....

    AV beat me to the sack number but Redskins had most of their starters the entire season including Campbell. We tallied a ridiculous amount of sacks in a few games including 8 in one game because our line was utterly depleted..

    Kind of says alot when their guy still gets sacked more than ours.
    Not necessarily. Did Washington change their entire offense prior to the start of the season to emphasize, almost exclusively, quickly developing short pass plays and handing off to the tailback? Sacks alone don't tell the whole story.

  15. #15
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Bradford Contract: Which is the more reasonable statement?

    Here are some recent QB deals signed

    Jamarcus Russell 68 mil with, 31.5mil guaranteed
    Matthew Stafford 72 mil(could be 78), 41 mil guaranteed
    Ben Roethlisberger 102 mil 33.2 mil guaranteed
    Philip Rivers 98 mil 38.2 mil guaranteed
    Eli Manning 107 mil 35 mil guaranteed

    My guess is Bradford is going to make 75-80 mil. The guaranteed money is where there is going to be hangups IMO. He is going to make 41 plus, but how much more is going to be where the hangup is, especially with Rivers being the most recently signed deal. Russell to Stafford went up 10 mil in guaranteed. It Will ultimately end being somewhere between 41-52 mil but it could be a struggle to get there.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 39
    Last Post: -04-01-2010, 01:51 PM
  2. Jim Thomas Live March 26 - Draft Chat
    By r8rh8rmike in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -03-27-2010, 01:02 PM
  3. Thursday Bernie Bytes: McNabb-Rams, Bradford,
    By eldfan in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -03-25-2010, 06:52 PM
  4. Salary Cap Request
    By HUbison in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: -12-31-2004, 02:48 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: -06-18-2004, 04:40 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
  •