Tweet
I have little or no knowledge of the college game so i put this question to the clan. If Bradford had stayed healthy last year, and had another solid season would there still be a debate over who we should pick? Ive read if Bradford came out last year for the draft he would have been valued higher than Stafford, this alone tells me he has talent. But would a completely healthy Bradford be better than the overall best player in the draft (and apparently best DT in the last decade) Suh?? Whether we need a QB or not, i still feel the new management will stick to their guns and build from the trenches before pulling the trigger on a QB
-
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
If Bradford has played last season and put up good numbers(Lets say 30 TD's and under 12 Int's) I dont think there would be any disputing who the top pick of the draft would be. No doubt that Suh would still be a top pick, but Bradford would clearly be the better pick for us.Originally posted by Bing69 View Post -
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
Whoops, was replying to the wrong thread!Last edited by Nick_Weasel; -03-04-2010, 12:14 PM.Comment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
exactly if bradford played without injury this past year he would be our pick no question.
picking Suh or Braford cant go wrong either way although this franchise needs a new hope and direction the most important position on the field is a qb and barring a dissapointing pro day with his shoulder or any setbacks he should be the guy. Offense was worse than our defense this year for the first time since the superbowl win has the defense been better than the offense. Attendence has been the worst this year than ever before the average fan would much rather want a qb jersey than a d-linmen, and i realize you have to have a good defense line and defense wins championships but Bradford along with jackson can move the rams in the right direction. besdies hopefully carriker can come back strong, and the DT class is deeper than QB.
Bradford wont be getting thrown into the fire as bad as stafford was. Bradford has the best running back in the confrence and our o line should be getting better with smith and brown leading it.Comment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
My worst fear is that we get a "red hot QB" and watch him get beat down all season like Bulger. We went through 3 Qb's this last season, is Bradford gonna step in and do something different?
No one ever answers.
Jake Locker 2011.Comment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
Maybe he will maybe he wont. You dont know, I dont know, no one knows. It's all a gamble. Sure some guys have a higher chance, Bradford has a higher chance to be successful then Zan Robinson. I would assume you would want Suh or McCoy with the first pick? How would that help us keep any QB off of his back? Are you proposing we take Iupati or Okung? For that matter say we pass on Bradford and take Locker, how are we going to keep him off of his back, who is to say that Locker wont bust in the NFL? Why is Locker a better pick next year then Bradford is this year?Originally posted by The Optimistic Lamb View Post
Does that answer your question?Comment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
i dont understand why anyone can ever say pass on bradford he is to fragile lets get Locker NEXT YEAR. First off how can u say next year the rams can get him, the chances of that happening are extremly slim who knows where we pick who picks ahead of us and how he does maybe Locker gets injured next year. i Bet many lions fans said when they had the first pick to lets get curry this year and bradford next year. Bradfford would have been the first pick last year and a deffinate top pick this year except for injury he is adding wieght and i dont suspect wieght to be a problem for him.
anyways a healthy bradford and a dominate Suh are both extremly wanted but i would pefer Bradford due to the rams needing to bring excitment back to the dome and another face to the franchise cant go wrong either wayComment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
Originally posted by jackson3909 View Post
You really think Bradford is a franchise qb? I think hes just the best average qb of an average qb draft class. The Rams can't be exciting by having a dominant defense and bringing in a veteran qb? I would love to see the Rams get Locker and its not out of the realm of possibilities whether it be via trade or if they suck again. Will it happen probably not, but why pull the trigger on Bradford when many think he's over rated. Just because he's the best qb in draft doesnt make him a sure franchise player. I think the qb's in this draft are nothing to write home about. I'm all for drafting Suh number one over all and passing on the mediocre qb's.Aim high Willis, Aim High!Comment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
yes Bradford can be a franchise qb he has won a heismen trophy and is a very accurate passer has good height he only needs to bulk which he will anyways now he is becoming a pro.
Suh alone will not make the defense domiante right now its too early to tell OJ maybe on his way out(i pray he is not) Little might not come back. we dont know what we have at our corners or on either side of JL. what veteran qb are we gunna get dont even say vick. buldger just needs to go i feel sorry it has to end like that to Buldger but he had 3 awful seasons.
the rams need another direction i live in new york and matt sanchez did wonders for the jets if Bradford declared last year he would have been the top pick if he didnt get that freak injury we wouldnt being having this thread. its football everyone has suffered an injury before Bradford is on scehdule and lets see how his pro day goes but barring a setback he needs to be the rams selectionComment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
I'd go for Bradford, if Tampa Bay's willing to give us good trade picks otherwise I'd rather pick Suh.
♪ R.I.P. Nujabes ♫
Comment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
The man who threw 50 TD's and 8INT's(two of which bounced off of his receivers hands) . Ya, I would say that kid had a decent chance of being a franchise QB.Originally posted by rammiser View PostComment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
This is my last thread on Bradford. Bradford as everything you want in a franchise guy. Fairly Strong Arm (yes, throwing 50 yarders with zip is a strong arm), Good Accuracy, Intelligent, Confident, Leader, High Character. What's not to like about him. He even won in college something Locker has yet to do although I don't blame him.
Simply saying only thing Locker has that Brad doesn't is (I'm guessing) 4.5 speed and a non-surgically repaired shoulder. Bradford is more accurate and their arm strength is fairly equal. I think Bradford is plenty mobile and athleticComment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
Well if you want a Plan B contingency if Locker is gone, Mallet's also better than Bradford.;)Originally posted by jackson3909 View PostComment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
To let everyone know oklahoma likes to run up the score so bradfords stats from last year are results of 60-12 wins over ****ty teams!Comment
-
Re: Healthy Bradford or dominate Suh?
Bradford 2008 season ranked teamsOriginally posted by TakeSuh View Post
#17 cinncy 38 att 29 cmp 5td 2 int
#7 TCU 34 att 19 cmp 4TD 0 int
#4 Texas 38 att 28 cmp 5 td 2 int
#12 Tex Tech 19 att 14 cmp 4 td 0 int
#16 ok st 44att 30 cmp 4 td 0 int
#19 Missouri 49 att 34 cmp 2 td 0 int
#1 Florida 41 att 26 cmp 2 td 2 int
Seems like pretty good stats to me vs. rasnked opponents.Comment
-
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),...-03-12-2010, 10:33 AM -
I know ill get bashed for this but i really think Suh would be the better choice as the no.1 pick. Now that Carriker is gone, we can forget about that 'we've made 2 high defensive picks in the last 3 years,we have to draft Bradford ahhhhhh' thing. We only have Long now.
Lets think about our defensive line
Long Ryan Robbins Little? Hall
That line aint gonna do very well now is it. Especially if Little doesnt come back. Now if we draft Suh it will look like this
Long Ryan/Robbins Suh Little?Hall
Already looks more solid. Now what if we trade for Osi
Osi Ryan/Robbins Suh Long
That line looks like it could cause trouble.
If we draft Bradford, sure the offense would improve slightly, or it could be just a dire. I understand the logic of picking Bradford, give us hope, a new face for the franchise etc. but Jackson is the face of our franchise. Maybe McCoy will be a wonderful hit (if we draft him)
This is just how i feel, and i can say honestly if we pick Bradford tomorrow i will not be happy! But i will support the lad, and hope he brings the business. I just want us to shun the media and experts by taking Suh and continue to build a good , talented, young base which will put in a good position for years to come-04-21-2010, 06:58 AM -
After last season I wanted the Rams to finish near the bottom to have a shot at Sam Bradford. Well now a year later my wish for a franchise QB is a reality. But all I've been hearing about is how Suh is the best DT to come out in decades. Man now I'm really torn. Lets get some discussion going between the two players...-01-03-2010, 02:17 PM -
There is a lot off back an forth on taking DT or QB with our first pick.
At the end of the season I had a clear feeling that most would want Suh, but now many want Bradford. So did you change your mind and if yes why?
Until now Bradford has not done much do rise his stocks, only a good interview and maybe gaining some weight. Suh had a VERY good combine so he has done nothing to decline his value.I wanted Suh then and I want him now33I wanted Suh then but I want Bradford now13I wanted Bradford then but want Suh now0I wanted Bradford then and I want him now5I want somebody else3-03-15-2010, 03:18 PM -
Something struck me today when posting in another thread about the first overall pick this april and the impact either Bradford or Suh could have on the players around them. I made the case that both players have the potential to significantly impact the players around them in the long term, whilst Suh probably has the advantage of being able to do so almost from the first day of practise.
I started to wonder why that is and I think it comes down to something deeper than the well-stated grooming period for rookie QBs. Our situation is quite particular because of who we have on defense. We may well return all of our starters at every position except for Defensive End. (Obviously Bradley Fletcher will be plugged in at corner in an attempt to stop some of the bleeding from the position last season. For the purposes of this discussion, he doesn't count because he's already on the roster.) Whilst I would not be entirely comfortable with this (we'll need a DE ASAP if Little doesn't return) I am much more comfortable with returning our starters on defense than on offense.
In my opinion, a player like Suh can make these already established starters a whole lot better. It's a given that the play of the linebackers flanking Lauriniatis, which was heavily criticised last season, stands to see exponential levels of improvement with a better pass rush. And I say this completely aware that the incumbent starters may return to their positions in the first unit. We're not exactly missing a Defensive Tackle in particular, but we are lacking a pass rush in the worst way. Suh will go a long way to providing that, putting Chris Long, and everybody else up front for that matter, in a better position to make plays.
I can't say I can see the same thing on the offense. Despite our best efforts, our OL is still a mess. Jason Smith, Jason Brown and Jacob Bell are the building blocks and it looks like Alex Barron might be back. For argument's sake, I'll say that only two of the five positions are secure. I'm not convinced Bell won't have to fight to keep his job. We are devoid of a second runningback and our receiving corps is still under question. Lord knows who our starting Tight End will be.
My point is this: the immediate potential Sam Bradford could show as a member of the St. Louis Rams is mooted by the players around him, or the lack thereof. Not all needs can be filled in one offseason and if Bradford were the pick, I wouldn't expect him to start this season anyway. It just seems to me like the supporting cast on defense is much stronger than what we have on the other side of the ball.
I'm completely undecided as to who should be our pick. I was a huge advocate of Suh when the season ended but the arguments in favour of a QB are equally as strong. If we draft Bradford, it's going to be a good day to be a Detroit Lions fan. They got their guy last season. They have one of the best WR's to...-03-13-2010, 12:35 AM
Comment