My final take on Bradford vs. Suh.

[HUbison]

These thoughts will not change over the next month.......assuming neither of them molests a goat or some such thing. Here's a few things that I think will happen over the next decade (barring injury or end-of-the-world type stuff):

Bradford will be a very good QB.

Suh will be an elite DT.

With Suh, the Rams defense will show serious improvement, including better ypa in the rush D, and more pressure on the QB. The offense won't change all that much.

With Bradford, the Rams offense will show some improvement, but will require improvements to the receiving corp to make any large steps forward. The defense won't change much at all.




I understand the QB choice. I do, I get it. And Bradford will be a really solid QB. He'll show it on his pro day; he'll make crisp accurate passes, he'll dazzle in interviews, he will demonstrate to franchises that he is an intelligent, articulate young man with all the intangibles you'd ever want.

But he won't be the player that Suh will be.

Bradford will walk into Rams Park, and on the practice field, he will make everyone believe that scientists cloned Phillip Rivers and Kurt Warner, combined the DNA, and out popped Sammy.

But he won't raise the offense the way that Suh will raise the defense.

With Bradford, his success will rely on other pieces. Will the receivers be able to separate so that his amazing accuracy can be demonstrated? Will the line protect him the way that his Oklahoma line (manned by 5 NFL lineman in 2008) protected him?

With Suh, his success will not be as dependent on those around him. Rather the opposite. The DEs will see more lanes as Suh occupies the interior. Same for blitzers. The DBs will look better as pockets collapse and QBs have to rush passes.

Bradford will be good.......but every draft has a "Bradford".
Suh will be great........and there may be one "Suh" a decade. (Not my words, by the way.)

So do we draft a Bradford, then wait a decade for the next Suh?
Or do we draft Suh, and pick up next year's Bradford?



Look, I'm not saying Bradford isn't worth the #1 pick......if Suh weren't in it. Take Suh out of the draft, and Bradford is the #1 pick (though McCoy fans would have their valid points as well). So, no, I'm not going to complain about drafting Bradford at #1. In any ordinary year, he is a #1 pick.

I'm just saying that with Suh available, this isn't an "ordinary" year.

I'm sure Bradford will do fine. But I would be lying if I said his long-term health isn't a concern. The Rams have protected their QB with a sack % of 7.5% to 8.0% over the past few years. But he's coming from an offense that protected him with a sack % of 2.7%. And even then (as Nick has pointed out), he didn't finish a season in one piece.

[smizzhfx]

2009 Rams Season in Review:

Total Offense Ranking: 29th.
Passing Offense Ranking: 28th.

10.9 Points per game.

2,686 passing yds, 12 TDs, 21 INTs from a carousel of has-been's and will-never-be's.

So explain to me how a DT is supposed to fix this problem.

[AvengerRam]

I'm still undecided on this issue, but I can tell you two things:

1. Whichever player I ultimately favor, I'll be far from certain that I've chosen correctly; and

2. I will not fault anyone for favoring the one I don't pick.

To me, its a classic risk/reward scenario. Suh is much lower risk. Bradford (merely because he is a QB) has a higher potential reward.

If I felt a little more strongly about the prospect of drafting Colt McCoy, Dan LeFevour or Tony Pike, I think I'd remain firmly in the Suh camp. As it stands right now, I don't quite have that level of confidence in the tier 2 group, though that could change (particularly if the scouts come from McCoy's workout pleasantly surprised with his arm strength).

If I were to describe where my brain is in terms of percentages right now, I'd say its Suh: 50.25%; Bradford 49.75%. Its literally that close.

[MauiRam]

2009 Rams Season in Review:

Total Offense Ranking: 29th.
Passing Offense Ranking: 28th.

10.9 Points per game.

2,686 passing yds, 12 TDs, 21 INTs from a carousel of has-been's and will-never-be's.

So explain to me how a DT is supposed to fix this problem.

By itself, it won't .. But the acquisition of another young OT, at least one more good receiver and a solid number two running back will help alot. Hopefully we'll find a way to give our starting Qb better protection than last year's team did. FA and the draft ought to least give us some new blood at those positions.

A great DT may not help a Qb score points, but he can influence the issue of allowing opposing teams to run up the score early, thereby taking away our running game, and forcing us to throw every down.

[RebelYell]

I'd agree with Av except my percentages are about 60% Bradford and 40% Suh.

It's not right but the biggest factors for me going with Bradford are:

a. We've gone DT 4 times in recent past and 3 flopped. The fourth was the biggest gamble, he panned out and the team let him walk. Of the 3 that were highly drafted, all were considered can't miss picks.

b. I can imagine what that dome is going to look like if Bulger is our starting QB yet again come September. "Half Empty" is what it's going to look like. The Rams need to sell tickets, pure and simple. Interior linemen don't sell season tickets. If the Rams don't sell tickets, they won't be pushing the salary total next offseason. This choice isn't made in a vacuum. When the NFL finally gets a CBA back in place, free agents will become available and I want the team to be aggressive, not questioning whether they can afford it.

I know it's easy to claim Suh is a sure thing but no draft pick is a sure thing. To say he WILL be an elite player is an over statement. He CAN be an elite player. He can also be Dan Wilkinson. Glenn Dorsey was a can't miss DT. Johnathan Sullivan was can't miss. Ryan Sims? Gerald Warren? Defensive Tackles have about as much record of can't miss turning into duds as QBs. It seems to me the best chance of success if finding a DT who can play NT. That's where Gerald McCoy comes into the equation. Suh has bigger upside but McCoy probably has the lesser risk.

[Dominating D]

2009 Rams Season in Review:

Total Offense Ranking: 29th.
Passing Offense Ranking: 28th.

10.9 Points per game.

2,686 passing yds, 12 TDs, 21 INTs from a carousel of has-been's and will-never-be's.

So explain to me how a DT is supposed to fix this problem.

Turnovers, field positions...... Confidence in the Defense so the O can be more aggressive with play calling. Also, a full camp with young wide recievers and working in the 2nd year of the O system.


I am starting to warm up to the thoughts of drafting Bradford but the INJURY is a major concern for me.

M. Faulk made a statement that seem very relevent. Not an exact quote but meat of it is that QB's with shoulder injuries never fully recover.

Thought about it and it makes alot of sense to me for example I can think of several QB's with shoulder injuries who's performance declined and seem to have ongoing struggles with the shoulder.

Example:

Tim Couch
Mark Bulger
Chad Pennington
Ryan Leaf
Joey Harrington
Alex Smith
Mark Rypien
Mark Brunell


those who did not decline

Brees
Straford


If the Rams decide to go with Bradford I hope they're smart about the the guarantee money?

Go Rams

[RAMarkable]

Hub,

A few comments on your thread:

1.) I agree with your assessment on the o-line. That is why in my board I have the Rams taking either Vlad Ducasse or Bruce Campbell with the 33rd pick or if that is not feasible, Jared Vorhees or Kyle Calloway at the top of the 3rd round. If we are gonna take a QB overall we must protect him better.

2. You mentioned that "every draft has a Bradford". Well, maybe so, but they are almost always top 5 picks and therefore very difficult to procure.

3.) Suh may be an elite DT but most NFL teams don't look at the defensive tackle position as an essential or "franchise" position. Usually these positions on the defensive side are a pass rushing DE and a shut down corner. Sure it would be nice to have a guy like Suh but we'll never consistently win unless we address the "franchise" positions like QB.

Having said all of this I do thank for your cogent thoughts.

WHAT SAY YE?

[BrokenWing]

This is the sort of thread I've been looking for on the subject. Your points are well reinforced, instead of stated and left alone. I'd have to side with Av for the most part on this one though, I see reasons for both.

[HUbison]

2. You mentioned that "every draft has a Bradford". Well, maybe so, but they are almost always top 5 picks and therefore very difficult to procure.

And top 5 is exactly where I see us drafting next year regardless of whom is selected this year.

3.) Suh may be an elite DT but most NFL teams don't look at the defensive tackle position as an essential or "franchise" position. Usually these positions on the defensive side are a pass rushing DE and a shut down corner. Sure it would be nice to have a guy like Suh but we'll never consistently win unless we address the "franchise" positions like QB.

And with a consistent interior pass rush threat, the DEs and CBs start looking better and better.

Having said all of this I do thank for your cogent thoughts.

And thank you for yours.

[BrokenWing]

Top five? That's depressing...

[HUbison]

a. We've gone DT 4 times in recent past and 3 flopped. The fourth was the biggest gamble, he panned out and the team let him walk. Of the 3 that were highly drafted, all were considered can't miss picks.

That's where I'd disagree, Rebel. I assume you're referring to Lewis, Pickett, Kennedy, and Carriker. Three selections in the mid-1st, one in the late 1st, and I would say with certainty that NONE of them had the scout grade that Suh has.

b. I can imagine what that dome is going to look like if Bulger is our starting QB yet again come September. "Half Empty" is what it's going to look like. The Rams need to sell tickets, pure and simple. Interior linemen don't sell season tickets. If the Rams don't sell tickets, they won't be pushing the salary total next offseason. This choice isn't made in a vacuum. When the NFL finally gets a CBA back in place, free agents will become available and I want the team to be aggressive, not questioning whether they can afford it.

Nor does QBs sell season tickets. Wins......that's what sell season tickets. And IMO, Suh will do more to generate wins than will Bradford.

I know it's easy to claim Suh is a sure thing but no draft pick is a sure thing. To say he WILL be an elite player is an over statement.

I assumed that "In my opinion" was always implied. Go back and insert "IMO" before all of my statements when you re-read them.

[HUbison]

Top five? That's depressing...

Yes, it is. Hopefully, I'm wrong.

[BrokenWing]

I sure hope so. I at least want four or five wins...Which granted is still top 5 but this 1-15 business isn't cool.

[HUbison]

1. Whichever player I ultimately favor, I'll be far from certain that I've chosen correctly; and

2. I will not fault anyone for favoring the one I don't pick.

And ultimately, that's where I am. If the Front Office believes Bradford is the better prospect for this team, then so be it; welcome to St. Louis, Sam.

But right now, my scales are tipped the other way.

[RAMarkable]

And top 5 is exactly where I see us drafting next year regardless of whom is selected this year.

That would mean that the Rams would have a record of, say, 3-13 or possibly 4-12.

Well, then we might as well start a new thread titled "Who do you want as the new GM and HC of the Rams" as I see no way either Spags or Billy survives. Granted this is getting off topic but I do believe that Bradford would help produce a better record than that.

Bottomline: When there is a potential franchise QB on the board and you don't have one, you take him.


WHAT SAY YE?