Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Guest BillikenReport

The Rams need someone to be the face of the franchise.

Sam Bradford accomplishes that. Ndamukong Suh would not have.

Kevin Williams of the Minnesota Vikings is considered to be the best or one of the elite defensive tackles in the NFL. Last season, he had 30 tackles and six sacks.

If Suh puts up similar stats next season, which is highly unlikely, how many Rams fans would complain that he didn't live up to the hype and his contract that makes him one of the highest paid players at his position?

Bradford looks like more of a franchise QB than either Jimmy Clausen or Colt McCoy.

McNabb would have been an awful choice. I think he's still got a few good years left, but he wouldn't make the Rams a winner next year and it wouldn't be long before the Rams would need to find their next franchise quarterback to replace McNabb.

The Rams will now either sink or swim in the next however many years with Bradford. If he turns out to be good, the Rams will be good. If he turns out to be Ryan Leaf or David Carr, the Rams will continue to stink.

Now the Rams have to find at least two more impact guys in the second and third rounds. I'm not sold on any of the top guys still available, so hopefully whoever is making the decisions for the Rams can find a WR or LB or DT or TE or OL or RB who can make a difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Living in Denver, I'm forced to follow the Broncos. What the broncos have done these last 2 drafts is unbelievable and not in a good way.

Bradford has all the tools to be a franchise QB. I don't think he is as mobile as skip thinks, but he is mobile enough. However, I think Bradford will be injury prone and is too risky for my liking because of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rams need someone to be the face of the franchise.

Sam Bradford accomplishes that. Ndamukong Suh would not have.

Kevin Williams of the Minnesota Vikings is considered to be the best or one of the elite defensive tackles in the NFL. Last season, he had 30 tackles and six sacks.

If Suh puts up similar stats next season, which is highly unlikely, how many Rams fans would complain that he didn't live up to the hype and his contract that makes him one of the highest paid players at his position?

Bradford looks like more of a franchise QB than either Jimmy Clausen or Colt McCoy.

McNabb would have been an awful choice. I think he's still got a few good years left, but he wouldn't make the Rams a winner next year and it wouldn't be long before the Rams would need to find their next franchise quarterback to replace McNabb.

The Rams will now either sink or swim in the next however many years with Bradford. If he turns out to be good, the Rams will be good. If he turns out to be Ryan Leaf or David Carr, the Rams will continue to stink.

Now the Rams have to find at least two more impact guys in the second and third rounds. I'm not sold on any of the top guys still available, so hopefully whoever is making the decisions for the Rams can find a WR or LB or DT or TE or OL or RB who can make a difference.

Disagree on almost all counts.

Suh could have been the face of the franchise. He's an incredibly impressive guy in every way I've seen. Had a tough major in the engineering school, which he just pledged $600,000 to (and another $2 million to the athletic department for facility upgrades). Smart kid, good family, amazing defensive leader to his team. Oh yeah, and he plays like an absolute beast. I'll be interested to see the Lions-Rams game this season because he might be the one putting Bradford on his ass. Everyone expects a rookie learning curve but in the age of instant gratification, Suh is way more game-ready right now than Bradford.

Bradford might turn out better than Clausen, but enough to justify going first overall while Clausen doesn't even go in the first round? Please. Clausen has a legit shot to be better. I wouldn't have been disappointed with McCoy at 33, either.

I don't get how McNabb would have been an awful choice. Yeah, we want to think long-term, but so did the 49ers when they took Alex Smith, or the Lions when they took Joey Harrington, or the Texans when they took David Carr, and so on. Mario Williams made that team a lot better right away; Carr didn't. I have no problem taking a veteran for the twilight of his career, filling in the other pieces, and maybe taking a guy next year to learn from McNabb before taking over.

I want to be wrong about Bradford, who also seems like a great dude. But I look at the roster and management of that franchise, and see no reason why he's going to succeed anytime in the next few years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rams drafts last 7-8 yrs have been horrible.

Trung Candidate, Leonard, Tye Hill, Carriker, Kennedy, Lewis, Archuletta, Byrd, Hargrove, Worten, Klopfenstein, Robert Thomas, Barron...

Only Stephen Jackson is a star, maybe Long and Jason Smith will be OK, too.

Bradford is a risk, but could be another Brady-Manning; worth the risk IMO, develop him, big guy, great arm and accuracy.

Worry about his durability, and some worry about him working from under center.

Quality person, everyone attests that he possesses integrity and leadership skills.

Lou Holtz says Bradford is best he has seen coming out of college in a long, long time.

RE: Suh and McCoy... outstanding but 90% of pro DT is "desire", not talent... when they get $ 20 million guarantee, will they kamakazee in there every play? Thats why big time DT drafted in 1st round can be huge flops for the money.

Somewhat different with other postions, more visible RE: their efforts.

KEY will be rounds 2-3-4, Rams can get some good players. Will they?

Hope they trade first pick in 2nd round to one of the 4 or 5 teams that have two 2nd round picks. Doubt it will happen. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have taken Suh over Bradford as well. Suh was a man amongst boys in college.

my problem with taking Suh over Bradford was simple. We had to come away with a qb who could play right now. Like I said, I'd have traded for McNabb, but we didn't, so someone has to play qb this year. Lets say you pass on Bradford and take Suh, are you 100% sure that Clausen or even Colt will be there? What if they aren't? There was certainly a chance none of them would be, who plays qb for you then? You can say, I feel confident one will be, but as a GM you'd be taking quite a gamble and would be completely screwed if you didn't end up with a qb that you believed could start next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

W/o changing the topic too much, can someone explain the dumping of Adam Carriker to move up only 28 spots in the 5th round while falling back 3 spots in the 7th round? Almost like getting a 4th round for our 5th round pick? For those that don't know,

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,3161177.story

Yes, Carricker has not performed as we would have liked. Yes, he was injured all last year. Yes, he fits better w/ another defensive scheme. But still, was this the best we could have done?

I have been supportive of Devaney but this makes no sense to me. Tell me there is more to the story!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

my problem with taking Suh over Bradford was simple. We had to come away with a qb who could play right now. Like I said, I'd have traded for McNabb, but we didn't, so someone has to play qb this year. Lets say you pass on Bradford and take Suh, are you 100% sure that Clausen or even Colt will be there? What if they aren't? There was certainly a chance none of them would be, who plays qb for you then? You can say, I feel confident one will be, but as a GM you'd be taking quite a gamble and would be completely screwed if you didn't end up with a qb that you believed could start next year.

If they took Suh, they might have done something drastic to ensure they ended up with a qb. Trading the 33 along with who knows what to move up to 25 and pick Clausen. Baltimore could have let the Rams know that Denver wanted their pick for a QB. Rams would have never expected Tebow as the one they were after and they might have gave up multiple draft picks/players for that Baltimore pick. The possibilities are endless. I just hope Bradford is our man. The Rams are due to have a draft pick end up a stud, hope it's Sam.

Link to post
Share on other sites

W/o changing the topic too much, can someone explain the dumping of Adam Carriker to move up only 28 spots in the 5th round while falling back 3 spots in the 7th round? Almost like getting a 4th round for our 5th round pick? For those that don't know,

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,3161177.story

Yes, Carricker has not performed as we would have liked. Yes, he was injured all last year. Yes, he fits better w/ another defensive scheme. But still, was this the best we could have done?

I have been supportive of Devaney but this makes no sense to me. Tell me there is more to the story!!

You know what's so funny about this .... swapping 5th rounders wasn't enough. The Rams are agreeing to trade Adam for a swap of 5th rd picks moving up just 23 spots in a rd of the draft where you more than likely don't come away with a starter anyway and it wasn't enough. Washington said no, you have to give us 3 spots in the 7th rd or we aren't making the deal. I mean could we not have thrown in a couple of orders of Toasted Ravs, or free Ted Drewes on their next trip to St. Louis and saved our 3 spots?

It's like when someone comes to my store and offers me a ridiculously stupid price for a car. I tell them I'd rather light the car on fire and watch it burn as that has more value to me than what you're offering. Isn't there something else we could have done with Carracker that would have more value than what we got? I mean who cleans up the field after practice? Wouldn't just lighting him on fire have more value as entertainment? There must be something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

W/o changing the topic too much, can someone explain the dumping of Adam Carriker to move up only 28 spots in the 5th round while falling back 3 spots in the 7th round? Almost like getting a 4th round for our 5th round pick? For those that don't know,

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,3161177.story

Yes, Carricker has not performed as we would have liked. Yes, he was injured all last year. Yes, he fits better w/ another defensive scheme. But still, was this the best we could have done?

I have been supportive of Devaney but this makes no sense to me. Tell me there is more to the story!!

I completely agree, why not see if Carriker can play, after rookie yr he has been banged up... now he might finally be physically and mentally ready to contribute. What is there to lose? Dumping another #1 draft choice. Only thing I can think of is "saving money" or Spags just thinks he is ca-ca for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree, why not see if Carriker can play, after rookie yr he has been banged up... now he might finally be physically and mentally ready to contribute. What is there to lose? Dumping another #1 draft choice. Only thing I can think of is "saving money" or Spags just thinks he is ca-ca for sure.

Exactly. When Carricker is compared to starters and Top 4 round draft picks, I understand he may not have a future. Also, I understand some guys do better playing in a 3-4 defense rather than a 4-3 defense. But to get so little in return? Seems like getting Washington's 5th round pick would have been giving away quality with little in return. This deal, though, astounds me.

Dumping money?? Sure. But all the Rams had to do was to cut the guy and he gets no money. Was there something in his contract about guaranteed money? Do the Redskins now have to pay him under the contract he signed with the Rams? If he is not worth it, guess they can cut him like the Rams could have done.

Hope there is more to this story that has not yet come out publicly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dumping money?? Sure. But all the Rams had to do was to cut the guy and he gets no money. Was there something in his contract about guaranteed money? Do the Redskins now have to pay him under the contract he signed with the Rams? If he is not worth it, guess they can cut him like the Rams could have done.

If the Rams cut him would they have gotten draft pick compensation or anything like that? They did get more than they would have if they just cut him, I believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We just need to ensure that Bradford has weapons - another WR, backup RB, a TE. Robinson, Avery and Gibson are not a bad trio of WRs, but if we had a WR with some size, it could really make a big difference. And Robinson and Avery have to stay healthy, of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. When Carricker is compared to starters and Top 4 round draft picks, I understand he may not have a future. Also, I understand some guys do better playing in a 3-4 defense rather than a 4-3 defense. But to get so little in return? Seems like getting Washington's 5th round pick would have been giving away quality with little in return. This deal, though, astounds me.

Dumping money?? Sure. But all the Rams had to do was to cut the guy and he gets no money. Was there something in his contract about guaranteed money? Do the Redskins now have to pay him under the contract he signed with the Rams? If he is not worth it, guess they can cut him like the Rams could have done.

Hope there is more to this story that has not yet come out publicly.

If they cut him, they might still owe him $$$$, all contracts are different, Bulger worked that way, not sure if the non cap year makes any difference.

Maybe you are correct, not sure.

A trade "saves some face".

Link to post
Share on other sites

We just need to ensure that Bradford has weapons - another WR, backup RB, a TE. Robinson, Avery and Gibson are not a bad trio of WRs, but if we had a WR with some size, it could really make a big difference. And Robinson and Avery have to stay healthy, of course.

I love the Bradford pick.

If the Rams don't trade the 33rd pick, then I will be pissed.

Let someone over pay for Clausen or McCoy, then Sergio Kindle and Aaron Hernandez from Florida.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the Bradford pick.

If the Rams don't trade the 33rd pick, then I will be pissed.

Let someone over pay for Clausen or McCoy, then Sergio Kindle and Aaron Hernandez from Florida.

Rachel Nichols is stationed at Rams Park, and she's reported that there has been a LOT of interest in that pick. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Rams make a deal.

I wonder where she's staying...

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Rams cut him would they have gotten draft pick compensation or anything like that? They did get more than they would have if they just cut him, I believe.

Not sure about salary cap implications, but generally, if the Rams had cut Carricker, then they would not have had to pay him (unless there is some guaranteed money due him) but that the Rams would pick in the 5th Round in the normal spot (28 spots behind were they now are). In essence, b/c there are 32 NFL teams, a 28 spot difference if equivalent one (1) round earlier. Moving up 28 spots is better than nothing and not paying him huge sums is better than paying these sums to him as a back-up, it just seems like we are giving up on him rather quickly. If he really played two (2) years and was bad, then that's different. Last year, though, he was injured the entire year.

Personally, I almost spit my coffee out and onto my computer screen when I read that the Rams believe they are really deep on the defensive line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the Bradford pick.

If the Rams don't trade the 33rd pick, then I will be pissed.

Let someone over pay for Clausen or McCoy, then Sergio Kindle and Aaron Hernandez from Florida.

Billy Devaney said today on ESPN radio that he would be very suprised if they did not trade the 33 pick. Must be a few interested teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Carriker may be a good player but he can't play in our system. He is a DL in a 3-4 scheme. He has no position in our scheme. He's too small to play tackle and not fast enough to play end. It was a horrible draft pick by us. The rest of the league knows he is a huge mistake and wouldn't have given us anything for him. Trading him was better than cutting him. Don't blame Devaney, blame the guys who drafted before he got here.

I'm lukewarm on the Rams draft. I think we got boxed in on Bradford. I think he'll be good but if we hadn't taken him I'm not sure if was a top 20 pick. Another tackle and corner is fine, we have to get rid of Barron he is horrible and our corners are bad. Still WR is such a glaring need. Gilyard is talented but we should have got someone higher. Would have liked us to try to trade our 2nd rounder to get late in the first to maybe take Bryant. It doesn't look like we made any horrible reaches or got any players who are headcases so that is a step in the right direction.

I can't believe Oakland didn't at least draft one player from the California Penal League. Maybe Al Davis is dead and they just haven't told anybody yet. He certainly wasn't running their draft this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...