Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 50 of 50
  1. #46
    TheRammer Guest

    Re: Why I think Sam Bradford should be our guy

    Quote Originally Posted by TakeSuh View Post
    what if suh played qb and dline? OMG OMG OMFG I JUST POOPED A LITTLE would be the reaction of our whole fan base.
    LMao wow, talk about racing stripes!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by PeoriaRam View Post
    If his development necessitates his sitting, then we need to pass on him. The Rams need immediate, Week 1 impact out of this pick simply because of the amount of money they are spending. We can get a Bradford-level QB next year. We can get a QB who would be economical to sit in a later round this year. There is no reason to force this pick.
    Exactly we need to pick BPA for immediate impact!
    Quote Originally Posted by Bralidore(RAMMODE) View Post
    A waxed car always shines better....
    lol Ya but if your at the car lot and you see a waxed car that is nice and shiny and one that is dull and you don't know how good it will look once you shine it ,which one do you buy? The one that's already was waxed and you know what your getting.... come on just use Mr. Me-og-ie Sense!

    Quote Originally Posted by PeoriaRam View Post
    Aaron Rodgers signed a $7.7 million rookie contract that could become $24.5 million with incentives. Bradford's contract will be $50 million more than the maximum of Rodgers. These are not similar situations. It is fine for Rodgers to sit, because he isn't chewing up a massive chunk of the Packers' payroll.



    He has all of training camp to absorb that knowledge. The entire season should be dedicated to putting it into practice. Especially since he should be able to learn Shurmur's playbook in about a week. (How many variations on the basic 3 yard slant can there possibly be?)
    Well said, comparing Aaron Rodgers and Bradford's situation is like comparing peas and carrots with Forrest Gump counting them!


  2. #47
    rob6465's Avatar
    rob6465 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    228
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Why I think Sam Bradford should be our guy

    Quote Originally Posted by RockinRam View Post




    First off, I am not an Oklahoma Sooner fan. On the contrary, I am a UT (Texas) fan, which makes it quite of a surprise that I like Bradford so much.



    Now let's get down to business.


    In this opinionated argument, I'm not going to harp on Suh. I'm going to stay closely to Bradford.

    Okay, first point.

    Devaney and Spags are trying to remake this franchise into their own philosophy and dynasty. In order to do that, they need a "fresh" start. And by fresh start it means setting the future for the most important position the field. The QB. In this perspective, ignoring everything else, Sam Bradford comes in to this team giving the Rams a new identity. It's the start of a new decade, and it should be the start of a new decade of Ram's football. We ended the last decade on a horrible note, stats wise, and it's time to start anew. Bradford coming in gives us that fresh start. No matter what people say about Suh, a fresh QB gives fans and the organization a much needed rejuvinator than a DT would ever give.


    Second point

    We are trying to run a West Coast Offense. And by what that means, we are not going to be consistently running huge pass plays, pass plays that require 50 yard bombs. We are running a timing offense, backed by a ground and pound running game led by Steven Jackson.

    And Sam Bradford would excel in our offense. Why you ask?

    Because,

    1) Bradford excels in the short and medium pass routes. His accuracy in these departments are spot-on elite, and he has enough zip to be solid in the WCO.

    2) He knows how to develop timing with his receivers. That is why the 2008 Oklahoma offense was so prolific. Bradford's timing with his receivers was insane. He is an amazingly smart QB who has great touch, feel, and timing to win in the NFL.

    That is why he would succeed in our offense. A WCO is based on timing between the QB and WR, and Bradford would wreck havoc once he gets the timing down with our young WR's.


    Third point

    More of why Bradford is a close to perfect fit for our scheme.

    Bradford is not a gun-slinger. That's been determined. He has above average arm strength, but he is by no means a Derek Anderson-Jamarcus Russell type QB.

    But that's better for Bradford. You know why?

    Because I would take a precision QB over a gun-slinging QB anyday of the week.


    Let's compare Bradford and other similar QB's (For example a young Marc Bulger) to a sniper. A sniper is patient, he doesn't make foolish decisions. He intelligently picks his target, and once he does, he delivers to his target with precision and timing. Snipers excel.

    Quarterbacks like Derek Anderson and Jamarcus Russell are gun-slingers. They can be compared to a shotgun. Shotguns aren't very accurate, and they spray bullets/passes hoping that one of them hits the intended target. Sometimes they do, and it looks wonderful. But most of the times, it's off target. Shotguns pack a powerful punch. But shotguns don't always excel.



    We don't need a shotgun for our WCO. We need a sniper. With our constantly improving O-Line, a field general like Bradford should excel. That brings us onto our fourth point.


    Fourth point

    People argue that a rookie QB would get bageled behind our O-Line. But they are misinterpreting our O-Line just because our O-Line ended the season on a bad note. But it was to be expected. We had ONE healthy starter playing, which was Alex Barron. Jason Brown was playing, but he was not fully 90-100%. We had Goldberg, Greco, Allen III, and Trautwein in. No wonder Null and Boller got banged up.


    If we have our full line back, it's really quite good.

    * Jason Smith should claim our LT spot for at least 12 years.

    * Jacob Bell is a good pass protector, and once he bulks up more, should be a bigger factor in the run game.

    * Jason Brown is a mauler and a great line general at center.

    * Right guard is unsure of as of right now. Greco is a suitable starter.

    * Right tackle is also unsure of. Barron might claim this spot.



    Fifth point


    A good offense wins games.


    And I know what you're thinking. "Rockin! A good defense wins games!"

    They win games too.

    But, if our offense consistently goes 3 and out, it doesn't matter if we have Ed Reed, Ray Lewis, Darelle Revis, and Darnell Dockett on our defense. They're going to wear out sometime.

    A good offense capable of scoring points and staying on the field helps a defense out greatly. When you have points on the board, it takes a lot of pressure of the defense. On the other hand, if your weary and tired defense is trying desperately to keep the team in the game when you're already down 3-27, that's a different story.


    Our offense was pathetic last year, and with the addition of Bradford, and new targets, plus the improvement in our WR corps, our offense should be up and running this next season.


    Misc. Rants

    Bradford's attitude fits this team. He is a confident, yet not cocky player. He is intelligent, unlike some other QB's. He has great work ethic, adding 15lbs. of muscle during the year, unlike other players who slack off after they are injured.

    Bradford carries himself well. He is a mature person who has the ability to carry this franchise.



    Conclusion

    That's about it. Criticism, arguments are welcomed, but don't just come in here and state, "I have a bad feeling about Bradford. But I think Suh is going to be BEAST! Hoorah!"



    If on draft day, we do draft Suh, I won't be complaining. I love the guy myself.

    But to me, Bradford is the more logical choice if we are indeed building this franchise to succeed in the future.



    ~Rockin
    AGREE!!! We need more QB than a DT.

  3. #48
    cfh128's Avatar
    cfh128 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Age
    31
    Posts
    776
    Rep Power
    29

    Re: Why I think Sam Bradford should be our guy

    Quote Originally Posted by PeoriaRam View Post
    If his development necessitates his sitting, then we need to pass on him. The Rams need immediate, Week 1 impact out of this pick simply because of the amount of money they are spending. We can get a Bradford-level QB next year. We can get a QB who would be economical to sit in a later round this year. There is no reason to force this pick.
    First of all, how do you know whether or not Bradford will start week 1? If Spags feels that Bradford gives us a better chance to win than Feeley or Null, he will play. Every rookie on our team with the exception of Foster made it onto the field last year. He is not afraid to play rookies.

    Second of all, what proof do you have that we can draft a QB of Bradford's calibur next year? I assume you are referring to Locker or Mallet, and if you think we are in position to draft them next year, then you are already admitting that Suh has not been much of a difference maker because we will have another high pick.

    I was slow to come around to Bradford, but I have seen the light. I don't think the questions about him are in reference to his skill set as you seem to be implying, but more about his durability. He seems to be strong and healthy and worthy of being picked #1 overall. I don't know if we will be in a position to get a top end QB next year. So unless you are comfortable in knowing that we may have no better option than Bulger, Feeley, or Null for the forseeable future, I think picking Bradford makes the most sense. Besides, we wouldn't be drafting Bradford so we can win week 1 next year. We would be drafting him so we can win games for the next 10 years.
    Last edited by cfh128; -03-29-2010 at 04:42 PM.

  4. #49
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Why I think Sam Bradford should be our guy

    Quote Originally Posted by cfh128 View Post
    First of all, how do you know whether or not Bradford will start week 1? If Spags feels that Bradford gives us a better chance to win than Feeley or Null, he will play. Every rookie on our team with the exception of Foster made it onto the field last year. He is not afraid to play rookies.
    I don't. However, for $80 million, we had better start him or I want somebody in the front office/coaching staff fired.

    Second of all, what proof do you have that we can draft a QB of Bradford's calibur next year? I assume you are referring to Locker or Mallet, and if you think we are in position to draft them next year, then you are already admitting that Suh has not been much of a difference maker because we will have another high pick.
    I think a Top 10 pick is all that it would take. Just about of the teams that project to be in the bottom third of the league are settled at QB. A Top 10 pick could represent a 4 to 5 game improvement in the schedule.

    I was slow to come around to Bradford, but I have seen the light. I don't think the questions about him are in reference to his skill set as you seem to be implying, but more about his durability. He seems to be strong and healthy and worthy of being picked #1 overall. I don't know if we will be in a position to get a top end QB next year. So unless you are comfortable in knowing that we may have no better option than Bulger, Feeley, or Null for the forseeable future, I think picking Bradford makes the most sense. Besides, we wouldn't be drafting Bradford so we can win week 1 next year. We would be drafting him so we can win games for the next 10 years.
    Unfortunately we can break Bradford just as easily as we broke Warner, Bulger, their backups, and just about every joe who's taken a snap for us in the last decade. David Carr, Akili Smith, and Joey Harrington looked healthy too.

    FWIW, I feel that "The team makes the QB" far more often than "The QB makes the team".

  5. #50
    RockinRam's Avatar
    RockinRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    4,074
    Rep Power
    44

    Re: Why I think Sam Bradford should be our guy

    Quote Originally Posted by PeoriaRam View Post
    I don't. However, for $80 million, we had better start him or I want somebody in the front office/coaching staff fired.
    Yeah we will start him, but when it is right time to start him.



    I think a Top 10 pick is all that it would take. Just about of the teams that project to be in the bottom third of the league are settled at QB. A Top 10 pick could represent a 4 to 5 game improvement in the schedule.
    IMO, I don't see what's so special about Locker. And Mallet, he's really raw. Reminds me of a white version of Jamarcus Russell-ish.

    Unfortunately we can break Bradford just as easily as we broke Warner, Bulger, their backups, and just about every joe who's taken a snap for us in the last decade. David Carr, Akili Smith, and Joey Harrington looked healthy too.

    FWIW, I feel that "The team makes the QB" far more often than "The QB makes the team".
    We can break him, if we don't correctly give him the right amount of playing time early in his career. Too much is bad, too little is bad.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Thursday Bernie Bytes: McNabb-Rams, Bradford,
    By eldfan in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -03-25-2010, 06:52 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: -03-25-2010, 09:45 AM
  3. My final take on Bradford vs. Suh.
    By HUbison in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: -03-12-2010, 05:20 PM
  4. Replies: 22
    Last Post: -03-07-2010, 03:00 AM
  5. Replies: 7
    Last Post: -01-11-2009, 05:39 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
  •