Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24
  1. #16
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,296
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: What about keeping Bulger as a starter

    Here's a list of quarterbacks taken in the top five picks in the last decade, and how many games they started in their rookie year:

    Stafford: 10 starts
    Sanchez: 15 starts
    Ryan: 16 starts
    Russell: 1 start
    Young: 13 starts
    Smith: 7 starts
    Manning: 7 starts
    Rivers: 0 starts
    Palmer: 0 starts
    Carr: 16 starts
    Vick: 2 starts

    As you can see, only two of the eleven quarterbacks failed to start a single game as a rookie. Those two (Rivers and Palmer) both had veterans in front of them playing good football that season (Brees & Kitna), and so they didn't need to be put on the field.

    Vick had Falcons veteran Chris Chandler in front of him, so he didn't need to be rushed on either.

    Russell missed all of training camp and the preseason, signed in mid-September, and still got onto the field for the Raiders.

    Simply put, if the Rams select Sam Bradford with the first overall pick, pay him $70-80 million with $40 million or more guaranteed, he's going to see the field in 2010 at some point. You can't spend that much money for a guy whom you aren't going to play in Year One. It's just not going to happen.

    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  2. #17
    dave626's Avatar
    dave626 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mo.
    Posts
    253
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    6

    Re: What about keeping Bulger as a starter

    I agree 100% normally

    ps. You dont take a guy like Bradford #1 overall, pay him 70 million dollars, and sit him.[/QUOTE]

    But THIS year the money doesnt matter ( so to speak ) and I think we will see some abnormal stuff going on.

    Null could be a good QB and time will tell, but if we draft Bradford then his importance to this team is diminished IMO, and I think you could get a 3rd QB almost anywhere next year. Draft, FA, the street(Reiley)

    thats all Im saying

  3. #18
    RebelYell's Avatar
    RebelYell is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    St. Louis ,Missouri
    Posts
    2,334
    Rep Power
    44

    Re: What about keeping Bulger as a starter

    For rookie QB starts, Stafford and Sanchez started week 1 but they missed games to injuries. I think it would be very unlikely Bradford isn't playing by week 6.

  4. #19
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,296
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: What about keeping Bulger as a starter

    Quote Originally Posted by dave626 View Post
    But THIS year the money doesnt matter ( so to speak )
    The money doesn't matter ONLY in regards to the salary cap. But the Rams are still going to be paying Bradford in 2010, and because of the price of first overall contracts, they're going to need some kind of return on that.

    You don't sign a guy to a six-year $80 million contract with multi-millions worth of immediate bonus money only to not put him on the field at all in the first year. Teams just can't justify that.

    Quote Originally Posted by RebelYell View Post
    For rookie QB starts, Stafford and Sanchez started week 1 but they missed games to injuries. I think it would be very unlikely Bradford isn't playing by week 6.
    Thanks for the clarification on those two guys.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  5. #20
    rob6465's Avatar
    rob6465 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    228
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: What about keeping Bulger as a starter

    Quote Originally Posted by dave626 View Post
    you have your starter (Bulger)
    you have a decent backup (Feeley)
    you have your future QB or work in progress guy (Bradford)
    you take Null and put him on the PS.

    No one is saying you take 6 QBs into the season, thats just stupid to even suggest.

    Boller is an UFA so hes gone.
    Reiley was signed late last year as an emergency guy.

    Null was not so impressive last year that he earned the 2010 starting job, or backup job, or even a 3rd string spot. So if someone where to grab him off the PS then so be it because you would already your THREE QBs.
    Agree with you 150%

  6. #21
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,485
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: What about keeping Bulger as a starter

    I have trouble imagining a scenario in which the Rams draft Bradford No. 1 overall and keep Bulger.

    If the Rams take a QB in Round 2 or 3, I could see them keeping Bulger for one more year, putting the rookie on the bench behind Feeley, and sending Null to the Practice Squad (though, given what the Chargers received for Charlie Whitehurst, maybe trading Null would make more sense).

  7. #22
    cfh128's Avatar
    cfh128 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Age
    31
    Posts
    776
    Rep Power
    29

    Re: What about keeping Bulger as a starter

    Spags proved last year that he isn't going to just hand the starting job over to anybody, regardless of how much he is getting paid or when he got drafted. If Bradford is our pick, I'm sure he would be starting at some point during the season, but it wouldn't surprise me to see Bulger or Feeley starting week 1.

  8. #23
    Richbert88's Avatar
    Richbert88 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Northern California
    Age
    47
    Posts
    1,215
    Rep Power
    33

    Re: What about keeping Bulger as a starter

    I can see Bulger staying if a QB is not drafted by the Rams in the first round. Tebow or something.

    I think he'd be gone if the Rams grab Bradford. And I think that might be a mistake.

    I wouldn't base the playing time of Bradford, or any young QB, on the young QBs taken in previous years. They must do what's right for the QBs development, not what the money and popularity of the FO demands, regardless of their job security issues.

    I say keep Bulger if at all possible if Bradford is taken. At some point with this teams luck, both he and Feely will go down, and Bradford will get a little time in having seen how not to do it.
    Semper Fi!

  9. #24
    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: What about keeping Bulger as a starter

    Time to follow in Carolina's Foot steps ... realize that, despite giving up loads of money, Bulger is not our future, Its easier to move on if he's not around ...

    Bradford should start .. Sanchez / Ryan & Flacco learnt more playing then riding the pine.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Bulger Back to Basics
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -09-14-2008, 08:24 PM
  2. Prisco on Bulger ...
    By MauiRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -08-28-2007, 09:06 PM
  3. Bulger shoulders the load
    By Nick in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: -06-05-2005, 09:39 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: -09-10-2004, 04:36 PM
  5. Bulger is QB of choice in St. Louis
    By RamDez in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: -08-13-2004, 03:23 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
  •