Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
  1. #1
    Alec22's Avatar
    Alec22 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    23
    Posts
    614
    Rep Power
    12

    Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    ESPN's Adam Schefter told a St. Louis radio station he is "willing to take all bets" on his prediction that the Rams will select Oklahoma QB Sam Bradford with the No. 1 overall pick.

    Schefter admits that he has not spoken to the Rams about the issue, but he insists he doesn't need to because he's "heard enough other things" from people around the league that he considers it a lock. Schefter also "promises" that Bradford is a top-5 player in this draft. The Rams are also reluctant to pay the going rate at No. 1 for a defensive player. If Schefter is correct, the Lions are sitting pretty at No. 2 with their choice of Ndamukong Suh and Gerald McCoy. Feb. 25 - 6:41 pm et
    Source: ESPN 101 St. Louis


  2. #2
    TakeSuh is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    colorado
    Posts
    109
    Rep Power
    5

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    bullcrap i hate espn

  3. #3
    jmk321's Avatar
    jmk321 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    albany
    Posts
    591
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    So he didn't hear it from the Rams but it's a lock. OK. I thought other reports this week were that the Rams were going to trade down. I guess if you report enough different things then one of them is bound to be right.

  4. #4
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,409
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    I do not know how somebody can pass up on Ndamukong Suh. He is the one of the best, and he is a non-stop hard worker.

  5. #5
    BarronWade's Avatar
    BarronWade is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,427
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    Its pretty funny that Bradford is a lock before the Combine and before the interviews rite?

    lol

    Just laugh this one off.

    But he might be on to something about the price of a Defensive player. Just something about paying a defensive player that much really has me thinking.

    I know paying a QB at 1 is way more but its more rewarding if the prospects pan out

    And even the most "safest" might not be so safe remember Aaron Curry last year?
    Last edited by BarronWade; -02-25-2010 at 09:29 PM.

  6. #6
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    Quote Originally Posted by BarronWade View Post
    Its pretty funny that Bradford is a lock before the Combine and before the interviews rite?

    lol

    Just laugh this one off.

    But he might be on to something about the price of a Defensive player. Just something about paying a defensive player that much really has me thinking.

    I know paying a QB at 1 is way more but its more rewarding if the prospects pan out

    And even the most "safest" might not be so safe remember Aaron Curry last year?
    Point 1. This town pays Matt Holiday $17 million a year for most of the next decade as a reward for not contributing materially to the Cardinals' success. I don't want to hear a thing about "overpaid" or cost. Also, if you are paying the same money regardless of who you take, it should be treated as sunk costs and the "cost-effective" move is to take the guy least likely to bust.

    Point 2. A QB is also much higher risk. Especially this year-both Bradford and Clausen have legitimate questions that need to be answered. Neither have a demonstrated ability to win big games, the "more talented" prospect is the product of a spread system that has failed to pan out in the pros in the past, and the more "pro-ready" QB has issues with maturity.

    Point 3. The word on the street is Jim Mora's staff completely mishandled Curry's development and made a habit of playing him out of position. That seems to be the root cause of his problems.

  7. #7
    Ram Mar Ram's Avatar
    Ram Mar Ram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Apia
    Age
    33
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    why pick him at number one ???? can trade down and still get him at 3 or 4 ... If your not going to take the Suh at number one, trade the pick to someone that does and get some value out of it, and still get your QB.

    Sh

  8. #8
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,296
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    Quote Originally Posted by BarronWade View Post
    Its pretty funny that Bradford is a lock before the Combine and before the interviews rite?
    And before his Pro Day when he throws for the first time in months in front of a meaningful audience.

    Here's the Pro Football Talk summary of what was said:

    Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
    Posted by Mike Florio on February 25, 2010 7:53 PM ET

    In a Wednesday spot with ESPN Radio in St. Louis, Adam Schefter offered up a surprisingly firm prediction regarding the identity of the first pick in the 2010 draft.

    Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford.

    Said Schefter: "I would like to record something here, on February 24th. Two months from the draft. And tell you who the number one pick is gonna be right now. On the basis of what I've talked to people around the league [about], everything I've heard. And at some point it's gonna shift to this guy, and I don't know whether it'll be now or late March. It'll probably be after his Pro Day, when he goes through his Pro Day and goes through his workout. Then all of a sudden -- it'll be about a month from now -- we'll start hearing, 'Wow. Would and could the Rams take with the number one overall pick Sam Bradford?'

    "And I believe ultimately, when all is said and done, that the Rams' number one pick on April 22nd, two months from now, will be Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford. I'm willing to take all bets on that one right now."

    Schefter later said he hasn't spoken to the Rams about it, but that based on everything else he's heard he believes "there's no way" the Rams won't take Sam Bradford.

    Schefter also threw a politely-crafted dagger at ESPN draftniks Mel Kiper and Todd McShay, without accusing them of wearing sausage casing and/or being a Holden Caufield fantasy. "I notice that Sam Bradford is not in their top five," Schefter said of Kiper and McShay. "I can promise you that's wrong. I can promise you that's wrong."

    Schefter ties his prediction to Bradford showing up at his Pro Day and looking healthy. Though some thought his shoulder injury might scare off teams at the top of the draft, we think that Drew Brees' Super Bowl win four years after his shoulder supposedly was wrecked likely will make a team more inclined to take a risk.

    We're not sure it means he'll be the first pick.

    Still, mark it down. Schefter says Bradford will be the guy. It vaguely reminds us of the time that another ESPN analyst said that the Texans will take Reggie Bush with the first overall pick "no matter what anyone says."
    We'll see how this develops. For as many projections as there are out there with the Rams taking Suh, I don't think projecting a QB to them is that outrageous of a prediction, so I'm not sure how far out on the ledge Schefter is really going. Still, it's tough to imagine the Rams passing on an elite defensive player at a position of need for a quarterback with, among other things, health questions.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  9. #9
    RebelYell's Avatar
    RebelYell is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    St. Louis ,Missouri
    Posts
    2,336
    Rep Power
    44

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    Sounds more like something McShay would write or say.

  10. #10
    Rambunctious's Avatar
    Rambunctious is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,198
    Rep Power
    53

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    To many reporters look at this formula as a win win.

    Make an outlandish claim early and if it comes true you promote yourself as a genius. "I called this all the way back in February!"

    Get it wrong and he won't even skip a beat analyzing the pick of Suh as a good move. Everyone will be too excited to remember back to February and say "Hey... but didn't you get this wrong."

  11. #11
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,296
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    Exactly. When you're a talking head, you can basically claim whatever you want. No one's going to hold you accountable if your prediction turns out to be wrong. It's why Tony Dungy can sit on national TV and say he'd take Tebow; he's no longer a coach and his job isn't depending on him being right about the guy. It's not like the ESPN crew is going to call out Schefter if Suh is the pick.

    What's also interesting is that, while Schefter is great on breaking news and obviously has sources around the league, let's recall that he was as caught up as anyone in the mix that was the Rams' coaching situation last year. First he reported that Leslie Frazier was the favorite, and then he had the breaking news that Jason Garrett was on a plane to St. Louis and that signs pointed to him being the favorite or the next head coach. When the Garrett deal didn't get closed, he started backing off the report.

    The fact that he admits he hasn't talked to the Rams about it but has made his prediction based on other information is interesting. Perhaps this is what the Rams wanted all along - create an impression around the league that they're really thinking about taking Bradford first overall, in hopes of perhaps getting a trade offer. Ala the Jay Cutler situation in 2006.

    Or maybe they're legitimately leaning towards Bradford. We'll know in two months.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  12. #12
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    My question to this plan is, however, what's the point in trading down? Sure an extra second (presumably the add in) would be nice, but in all likelihood we'd be stuck with a high 1st Round pick and the top of our draft board already gone.

    In other words, I can see trading down from Suh if we really, really want Bradford, but if we don't really want Bradford, wouldn't trading down cost us a chance at drafting "our guy?"

  13. #13
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,648
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    The Rams are also reluctant to pay the going rate at No. 1 for a defensive player.
    where did they get this from? i havent seen this said anywhere

  14. #14
    Mooselini's Avatar
    Mooselini is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    3,724
    Rep Power
    28

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    This is funny. I think it's important that someone nails Bradford. Give him a real life playing environment and let him get hit. See if he gets up again. That fragile little glass princess will snap in two again.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Devaney, if you care about this team... fire the offensive coordinator!!!!

  15. #15
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,648
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: Rams to take Bradford #1 Says Schefter

    Quote Originally Posted by Mooselini View Post
    This is funny. I think it's important that someone nails Bradford. Give him a real life playing environment and let him get hit. See if he gets up again. That fragile little glass princess will snap in two again.

    Thats the one issue i have with Bradford. There are all these question about whether he can be an NFL QB, whether he has recovered from his injury etc

    But everyone has seen the Rams in recent years. They have watched Marc Bulger get pounded every game. Bulger, to his credit, has played tough. He has played while injured but has still had to miss a fair number of games through injury. Will Bradford be able to handle that kind of pounding? I havent seen anything to suggest so.

    The worst thing for me would if the Rams draft Bradford and he spends his first few years getting injured and being unable to play.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Jim Thomas Live - January 12, 2010
    By r8rh8rmike in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: -01-13-2010, 11:38 PM
  2. Rams Trivia - Share What You Know
    By AlphaRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 165
    Last Post: -11-11-2009, 08:22 PM
  3. Jim Thomas Live, November 6, 2007
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -11-06-2007, 06:41 PM
  4. PaRamFan48 Chistmas '99
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -03-18-2006, 11:18 PM
  5. Rams History
    By OldRamsfan in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: -02-08-2006, 03:36 AM

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
  •