- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 35,576
- Name
- The Dude
Bernie Miklasz
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colu...cle_7adee35c-8171-5750-9273-dc8479f7ebcf.html
GM Les Snead and head coach Jeff Fisher are standing by their man, Sam Bradford. The bosses have put the word out again: The Rams don’t intend to take a quarterback with the No. 2 overall pick in the 2014 draft.
Seeing that I am among the town’s leading Bradford apologists, you’d think this would make me happy.
You would be wrong about that.
I think the Rams would be shortsighted to rule out drafting a quarterback at No. 2 overall.
No, I haven’t flip-flopped on Bradford’s talent.
Yes, I realize that Bradford has burned through four NFL seasons. At some point, even a Bradford honk will lose patience. But Bradford was coming along nicely until having his knee shredded in the seventh game of this season. The injury put Bradford down for the season. It was yet another attack of bad luck in a career that can’t gain traction.
And that’s my primary concern here.
This isn’t about ability.
It’s about durability.
My pragmatic side makes it impossible for me to ignore Bradford’s obvious difficulty in staying healthy.
How can the Rams count on Bradford to lead them to consistent success when he has such an inconsistent record in being physically able to huddle up and play?
Going back to his collegiate football days at Oklahoma, Bradford has been been fully intact for only two of the last five seasons.
Let’s review Bradford’s career since he won the Heisman Trophy at OU in 2008:
In 2009, Bradford suffered a shoulder injury in OU’s first game and re-injured it later in the year. He started three games but only played one full game, meaning that he was healthy for only one of the Sooners’ 13 games.
In 2010, Bradford started all 16 games for the Rams and was named the NFL offensive rookie of the year. All good. Come on up for the rising.
In 2011, Bradford suffered a high ankle sprain in the Rams’ fifth game, at Green Bay. He missed six entire games and limped through five other starts. He really shouldn’t have played in them. Bottom line: Bradford was healthy for only five of the 16 games.
In 2012, Bradford started all 16 games and played well down the stretch. Back on track. Come on up for the rising ... again.
And 2013: Not so fast. Seven starts. The knee unravels. Nine games missed.
Over the past five seasons (college and pro) Bradford could have started a maximum of 77 games.
He started only 52 of the 77.
He was healthy and viable for only 45 of the 77.
Given that spotty track record, I’m not sure why the Rams’ authorities have such strong confidence in Bradford’s ability to endure.
And the starting quarterback’s health is a critical factor in determining an NFL team’s success.
During the 2013 regular season, NFL teams that received a minimum of 15 starts from their No. 1 quarterback posted a collective winning percentage of .600. Teams that had to rely extensively on backups paid for the instability with a losing record.
Of the 12 teams to qualify for the 2013 postseason tournament, 10 had at least 15 starts from their starting quarterback.
That continued the pattern. Bradford has been in the league for four years. Over that time, 40 of the 48 teams that made the playoffs had their starting quarterbacks in place for a minimum of 14 games in the applicable season.
Considering the vital importance of having your No. 1 quarterback go the distance, the Rams would be taking a huge gamble to disregard Bradford’s injury history.
The Rams simply can’t afford to view their No. 2 quarterback position as an afterthought. This is still a quarterback league. It’s still the most essential position on the field.
Do the Rams need to invest the No. 2 overall pick in a quarterback? No, they don’t. Just take a look at the two best teams in the NFC West: San Francisco drafted Colin Kaepernick in the second round; Seattle hit the lottery in landing Russell Wilson in the third round.
But if the Rams scout quarterbacks and are blown away by any of the top prospects — Teddy Bridgewater, Johnny Manziel or Blake Bortles — then they have to consider grabbing their guy at No. 2 overall. That depends on availability.
Given Bradford’s history, it’s hardly a luxury or a frivolous action to use the No. 2 overall pick on a potential franchise quarterback. Besides, the Rams can fill another need with their 13th overall pick, and as of now they hold nine selections in May’s draft.
Even if Bradford stays upright over the next two seasons, there’s no guarantee he’ll finally become an elite quarterback.
Moreover, there are no assurances of re-signing him to a reasonable contract.
Bradford has two years remaining on his original rookie deal. His salary-cap figures for the next two seasons are $17.61 million for 2014 and $16.58 million for 2015.
So I ask: What’s the bigger risk here?
Drafting a QB at No. 2 overall, or continuing to invest vast sums of money in Bradford?
It’s a legitimate question.
Because of the major change in the rookie compensation system that went into effect in 2011, the cost of paying a young quarterback has dropped dramatically.
For example, this season Kaepernick had a salary-cap figure of just under $1.4 million; Wilson’s 2013 cap figure is just over $681,000. Those figures go up slightly in 2014, but both quarterbacks are incredible bargains.
The Rams would save $10.42 million on the cap by cutting Bradford before next season. They would save nearly $13 million on the cap by bailing on Bradford before the 2015 season.
I’m not advocating a dump-Bradford play. But it’s silly to ignore the obvious reality here. He’s making a lot of money for a team that’s tight against the salary cap.
The Rams could have it both ways.
Keep Bradford and still afford to pay a quarterback drafted No. 2 overall. That keeps Bradford in place for 2014 and gives the Rams an appealing quarterback option if (A) he gets hurt again, or (B) falls out of favor.
Think of Philadelphia and young quarterback Nick Foles, who was ready to take over when Michael Vick broke down again. (Related note: Over the past three seasons Bradford has started only four more games than the frequently injured Vick, 33 starts to 29.)
This discussion becomes irrelevant if the Rams are ambivalent over the top quarterback prospects.
Or maybe Fisher and Snead identify a QB that they’d be excited to pull off the board in the second or third round.
All I’m saying is this: One way or another, the Rams need a viable alternative.
Unless, of course, Fisher and Snead truly believe Bradford is about to suddenly morph into an iron man and become something that he hasn’t been — namely, a quarterback who will start and complete full seasons and perform at an elite level.
It pains this Bradford apologist to say it, but the evidence suggests a different outcome.
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colu...cle_7adee35c-8171-5750-9273-dc8479f7ebcf.html
GM Les Snead and head coach Jeff Fisher are standing by their man, Sam Bradford. The bosses have put the word out again: The Rams don’t intend to take a quarterback with the No. 2 overall pick in the 2014 draft.
Seeing that I am among the town’s leading Bradford apologists, you’d think this would make me happy.
You would be wrong about that.
I think the Rams would be shortsighted to rule out drafting a quarterback at No. 2 overall.
No, I haven’t flip-flopped on Bradford’s talent.
Yes, I realize that Bradford has burned through four NFL seasons. At some point, even a Bradford honk will lose patience. But Bradford was coming along nicely until having his knee shredded in the seventh game of this season. The injury put Bradford down for the season. It was yet another attack of bad luck in a career that can’t gain traction.
And that’s my primary concern here.
This isn’t about ability.
It’s about durability.
My pragmatic side makes it impossible for me to ignore Bradford’s obvious difficulty in staying healthy.
How can the Rams count on Bradford to lead them to consistent success when he has such an inconsistent record in being physically able to huddle up and play?
Going back to his collegiate football days at Oklahoma, Bradford has been been fully intact for only two of the last five seasons.
Let’s review Bradford’s career since he won the Heisman Trophy at OU in 2008:
In 2009, Bradford suffered a shoulder injury in OU’s first game and re-injured it later in the year. He started three games but only played one full game, meaning that he was healthy for only one of the Sooners’ 13 games.
In 2010, Bradford started all 16 games for the Rams and was named the NFL offensive rookie of the year. All good. Come on up for the rising.
In 2011, Bradford suffered a high ankle sprain in the Rams’ fifth game, at Green Bay. He missed six entire games and limped through five other starts. He really shouldn’t have played in them. Bottom line: Bradford was healthy for only five of the 16 games.
In 2012, Bradford started all 16 games and played well down the stretch. Back on track. Come on up for the rising ... again.
And 2013: Not so fast. Seven starts. The knee unravels. Nine games missed.
Over the past five seasons (college and pro) Bradford could have started a maximum of 77 games.
He started only 52 of the 77.
He was healthy and viable for only 45 of the 77.
Given that spotty track record, I’m not sure why the Rams’ authorities have such strong confidence in Bradford’s ability to endure.
And the starting quarterback’s health is a critical factor in determining an NFL team’s success.
During the 2013 regular season, NFL teams that received a minimum of 15 starts from their No. 1 quarterback posted a collective winning percentage of .600. Teams that had to rely extensively on backups paid for the instability with a losing record.
Of the 12 teams to qualify for the 2013 postseason tournament, 10 had at least 15 starts from their starting quarterback.
That continued the pattern. Bradford has been in the league for four years. Over that time, 40 of the 48 teams that made the playoffs had their starting quarterbacks in place for a minimum of 14 games in the applicable season.
Considering the vital importance of having your No. 1 quarterback go the distance, the Rams would be taking a huge gamble to disregard Bradford’s injury history.
The Rams simply can’t afford to view their No. 2 quarterback position as an afterthought. This is still a quarterback league. It’s still the most essential position on the field.
Do the Rams need to invest the No. 2 overall pick in a quarterback? No, they don’t. Just take a look at the two best teams in the NFC West: San Francisco drafted Colin Kaepernick in the second round; Seattle hit the lottery in landing Russell Wilson in the third round.
But if the Rams scout quarterbacks and are blown away by any of the top prospects — Teddy Bridgewater, Johnny Manziel or Blake Bortles — then they have to consider grabbing their guy at No. 2 overall. That depends on availability.
Given Bradford’s history, it’s hardly a luxury or a frivolous action to use the No. 2 overall pick on a potential franchise quarterback. Besides, the Rams can fill another need with their 13th overall pick, and as of now they hold nine selections in May’s draft.
Even if Bradford stays upright over the next two seasons, there’s no guarantee he’ll finally become an elite quarterback.
Moreover, there are no assurances of re-signing him to a reasonable contract.
Bradford has two years remaining on his original rookie deal. His salary-cap figures for the next two seasons are $17.61 million for 2014 and $16.58 million for 2015.
So I ask: What’s the bigger risk here?
Drafting a QB at No. 2 overall, or continuing to invest vast sums of money in Bradford?
It’s a legitimate question.
Because of the major change in the rookie compensation system that went into effect in 2011, the cost of paying a young quarterback has dropped dramatically.
For example, this season Kaepernick had a salary-cap figure of just under $1.4 million; Wilson’s 2013 cap figure is just over $681,000. Those figures go up slightly in 2014, but both quarterbacks are incredible bargains.
The Rams would save $10.42 million on the cap by cutting Bradford before next season. They would save nearly $13 million on the cap by bailing on Bradford before the 2015 season.
I’m not advocating a dump-Bradford play. But it’s silly to ignore the obvious reality here. He’s making a lot of money for a team that’s tight against the salary cap.
The Rams could have it both ways.
Keep Bradford and still afford to pay a quarterback drafted No. 2 overall. That keeps Bradford in place for 2014 and gives the Rams an appealing quarterback option if (A) he gets hurt again, or (B) falls out of favor.
Think of Philadelphia and young quarterback Nick Foles, who was ready to take over when Michael Vick broke down again. (Related note: Over the past three seasons Bradford has started only four more games than the frequently injured Vick, 33 starts to 29.)
This discussion becomes irrelevant if the Rams are ambivalent over the top quarterback prospects.
Or maybe Fisher and Snead identify a QB that they’d be excited to pull off the board in the second or third round.
All I’m saying is this: One way or another, the Rams need a viable alternative.
Unless, of course, Fisher and Snead truly believe Bradford is about to suddenly morph into an iron man and become something that he hasn’t been — namely, a quarterback who will start and complete full seasons and perform at an elite level.
It pains this Bradford apologist to say it, but the evidence suggests a different outcome.
