Esiason: Don’t Count Out Bradford, Rams

[den-the-coach]

I'm more concerned with his ability to come back from an ACL tear on the same knee. That usually is not as successful. If he can than I would give him a chance at a reduced rate and ensure I drafted a QB that I believed could be the QB of the future.

 

[V3]

I disagree - I think you're the minority.

I'd say the majority of fans want to bring him back at the very least as a back up or to compete for the new job against a new guy (either draft/Fa/ or trade) - very few want him cut out right or not brought back at all in some capacity.

A bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush.

Are you basing that on what people here say or the real world? No one- and I mean no one- that I've talked to outside of this place says they want to bring him back. He had his chances. Sometimes you just need to move on.

 

[bwdenverram]

If the Rams bring him back, I don't expect many season tickets will be sold. The only reason to ever bring him back would be for a backup role and I'm not sure that's a good idea. It'd be very awkward for the players.

I respectfully disagree. Season tickets aren't sold because of just one player, unless you're Manning or Rogers. Next year this team should be even better. And until you sign or draft a QB better than Sam why not bring him back. Now I'm not suggesting at $15M+ a year but even if you have to cut him and re-sign him to an incentive deal he's still a talented player.
But the real question is if he can come back after two surgeries.

 

[-X-]

Are you basing that on what people here say or the real world? No one- and I mean no one- that I've talked to outside of this place says they want to bring him back. He had his chances. Sometimes you just need to move on.

Then you need better friends.

Honestly though, I read all of the Rams Boards. All of them. And it's not as prevalent as you're making it sound. There are a lot of people who think (say) that while it's improbable that he'll be the future of the Franchise anymore, there's still a distinct possibility that he could. The universal thought is that the plan B option needs to be accelerated to a plan A, though. And if he comes back to reclaim his spot, so be it. If not, so be it.

 

[dieterbrock]

I disagree - I think you're the minority.

I'd say the majority of fans want to bring him back at the very least as a back up or to compete for the new job against a new guy (either draft/Fa/ or trade) - very few want him cut out right or not brought back at all in some capacity.

A bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush.

I thought I read somehwere that too much bird in hand, and none in the bush makes you go blind or something. Or maybe it was hairy knuckles... Never mind....

 

[DR RAM]

Then you need better friends.

Honestly though, I read all of the Rams Boards. All of them. And it's not as prevalent as you're making it sound. There are a lot of people who think (say) that while it's improbable that he'll be the future of the Franchise anymore, there's still a distinct possibility that he could. The universal thought is that the plan B option needs to be accelerated to a plan A, though. And if he comes back to reclaim his spot, so be it. If not, so be it.

I think a lot of teams would like a healthy Sam Bradford as their starter. I agree with the statement that the Rams will move the QB position way up the chart, as a position of need. Personally, I'd love to see him come back, but it would have to be at a cheaper price, and the Rams would have to bring in some serious competition. I don't necessarily believe we have to give up our future, or draft if it doesn't line up. You can't force a QB. A vet might be the answer for this team, until we find a another franchise guy. I wish they did grow on trees, but they don't.

 

[JRobinson]

There are a lot of great responses in this thread; all of which are very valid in my estimation.

When I came off the field after a 3 hour game in the hot afternoon sun, and found out about Sam, I was livid and extremely angry. My partner was taken back by how emotional and passionate I am about my team. My heart is still trying to recover from the drop it took two days ago.

In my humble opinion, I believe that no matter how you look at it, or analyze the situation, the Rams are in a predicament. The decision lies in in the details. It will not be based on one or two things (how Hill responds, or how our record ends up). There are so many attributes that makeup this team, and the direction the Rams are going. This will be a long, long, drawn out and stressful process for not only the FO, but for all of us. I, like most, believe that this is a bit of a setback. Our window for a Championship is beginning to open, and now this? It's tough to deal with, and the decision on how to handle it, in my humble opinion, will determine the fate of not only Fisher and Co., but of the window of opportunity.

 

[V3]

Then you need better friends.

Honestly though, I read all of the Rams Boards. All of them. And it's not as prevalent as you're making it sound. There are a lot of people who think (say) that while it's improbable that he'll be the future of the Franchise anymore, there's still a distinct possibility that he could. The universal thought is that the plan B option needs to be accelerated to a plan A, though. And if he comes back to reclaim his spot, so be it. If not, so be it.

Plan B was Hill. After that, they had essentially nothing(Davis, Gilbert)- and this didn't come out of nowhere. Many of us were worried about this very thing which is why many wanted to trade down from 2 so badly so we had an extra first next year. Heck, some of us even debated whether to take Bridgewater at 13 or somewhere close. If Bradford is Plan B next year, they're idiots or have a gambling problem. Second ACL surgeries aren't as successful and take longer to heal. They don't even know if he'll be able to play next season so if they're planning on him being the backup, they'd better have a backup to the backup, as well. If Bradford is their Plan A for next season, God help them.

 

[DCH]

Well, here's the thing... you read all the reports from around the country on the Rams, and the underlying message is that we had a shot at the NFC West with Bradford, and without him it's going to be much more difficult (Gil Brandt on NFL Radio stated that explicitly last night, which I thought was nice, but he talks highly of literally every player in the universe).

So if you can bring back a guy with that much potential positive impact at a low salary with escalators to compete for a job with your current starter and a rookie, why wouldn't you?

Say 2015 you have Hill re-signed and, let's say Bryce Petty drafted late in the 1st. You want to carry 3 QBs, who better than Bradford? Unless Gilbert really shows something great this season, I'd take a recovering Sam Bradford for a mil or so as my 3rd QB over almost any other backup in the NFL.

 

[Ramhusker]

Then you need better friends.

Honestly though, I read all of the Rams Boards. All of them. And it's not as prevalent as you're making it sound. There are a lot of people who think (say) that while it's improbable that he'll be the future of the Franchise anymore, there's still a distinct possibility that he could. The universal thought is that the plan B option needs to be accelerated to a plan A, though. And if he comes back to reclaim his spot, so be it. If not, so be it.

I'd say that is probably pretty accurate. That's where I'm at as painful as it is right now. You've got to know Bradford is not still a Ram under his current contract. The only way he wears horns is with a significant cut in pay. This time, he has a couple more months to get back which he will probably need every bit of it. What a mess of a decision the front office will have next draft if Bradford is progressing ahead of schedule, Hill has a great year, and a stud QB is available in the draft. I think you still have to pull the trigger on drafting the QB. You can't take the gamble of Bradford alone any longer.

 

[Ramathon]

If Bradford played a position where it is comparably easy to find a solid starters, say OLB, then there would be little interest in his future and his career might well be over. The fact that Bradford plays QB, a position teams invest more time, scouting and money into to find a quality starter....and usually still fail....means he will play again if he wants to. If the Rams do not bring him back (understandable) he will not be on the market long. He will lose a bunch of money because of the injuries, but, the guy is 26. He has time to recover and if he has a couple of good years will be right back on the money train.
Whether the Rams bring him back or not, who knows? I certainly understand the position of letting him go. However, it depends on what sort of viable QB options there are for the team. If Hill comes out and has a very good season and the team does well (possible) then they just may cut bait with Bradford and resign Hill for a couple of years and try to find a rookie. If the teams stinks (possible) and the Rams end up with a high pick to land a QB they love in the draft then Sam is gone too. If neither one of those things happen, the Rams and Hill are ok but not great, and the team finishes in the 7-9 neighborhood again....they have a tough choice to make.
Best case for me is Hill comes in and tears it up and Bradford takes a cut to stay and the two can have a QB competition. If Bradford is healthy he wins this every time I think.
Will be interesting.

What he said...especially the highlighted in purple bits. Though he's made a terrific amount of $$ already, this latest injury has undoubtedly cost him millions.

 

[raised_fisT]

All of these pro-Bradford posts come with the disclaimer: "if he's healthy" . The guy will be coming off of his SECOND major injury to the same knee in a year and will have played in less than 50 of a possible 80 games thus far in his career. That's some sobering shyte.

 

[RaminExile]

QB's taken at the top usually play their first season. Might as well get the reps and let them learn on the job.

This happens because teams who draft a qb high usually are very much in need of one - because the incumbent sucks. That's not really the case here is it. Its that the incumbent is coming off a 2nd ACL in two years. I don't think any rookie is going to beat out Bradford in a competition.

 

[-X-]

Say 2015 you have Hill re-signed and, let's say Bryce Petty drafted late in the 1st. You want to carry 3 QBs, who better than Bradford? Unless Gilbert really shows something great this season, I'd take a recovering Sam Bradford for a mil or so as my 3rd QB over almost any other backup in the NFL.

There's nothing wrong with that at all.

Plan B was Hill. After that, they had essentially nothing(Davis, Gilbert)- and this didn't come out of nowhere. Many of us were worried about this very thing which is why many wanted to trade down from 2 so badly so we had an extra first next year. Heck, some of us even debated whether to take Bridgewater at 13 or somewhere close. If Bradford is Plan B next year, they're idiots or have a gambling problem.

Plan B was always going to be Hill, even if they drafted Bridgewater (who I wanted). So even if he was on the team now, he'd still be the backup to the backup. Nobody knows if Davis or Gilbert are "essentially nothing", and I find it peculiar that you could already know that. You might as well stick with your opinion that they're idiots, since they're the ones who drafted Gilbert and signed Davis. Bridgewater, Manziel, or any other QB is about as guaranteed as Gilbert is at this point. Next year, they might have to gamble on a QB drafted high, but that's no guarantee either. All of it is a gamble. And that's why they're building a team (Robinson, Donald) that's capable of sustaining success no matter who the QB is (within reason of course).

 

[LACHAMP46]

The more stuff I read, the more I'm like Boomer...His leg didn't get cut off...He's not paralyzed....Why can't he make a comeback? Shit, I was mad at Bradford in 2011...Now, I am a lil hot at Jake LOng....Not his fault....maybe, we shoulda had Benny on that side to chip-block...but I want Bradford to really show people now....Cause almost no one believes...It would be beautiful.....

 

[-X-]

The more stuff I read, the more I'm like Boomer...His leg didn't get cut off...He's not paralyzed....Why can't he make a comeback? crap, I was mad at Bradford in 2011...Now, I am a lil hot at Jake LOng....Not his fault....maybe, we shoulda had Benny on that side to chip-block...but I want Bradford to really show people now....Cause almost no one believes...It would be beautiful.....

It's not Long's fault. Tackles miss blocks sometimes. That, or every tackle Quinn faced is at fault for their QB getting sacked. And no, I'm not comparing Armanty Bryant to Robert Quinn. Just sayin'. It's part of the game. It was just an awkward hit with downward vertical force that caused a hyperextension. If Bradford had just gotten speared or shellacked instead of awkwardly fallen on, we wouldn't even be talking about this.

 

[Ramathon]

....And I honestly think it would be very awkward to have the previous "leader of the offense" come in and backup a QB that we'll take high in the first round. Do the players in the locker room follow the rookie (who is going to be the QB of the future unless he sucks) or stick with Bradford? That kind of stuff divides a locker room.

IMO, you make WAY too much out of the locker room politics. These guys are professionals. Though they may have a particular guy as a 'friend', they realize it's a business and a team game and have to play their best regardless of who the QB is.

Now if the scenario you describe where a rookie is drafted high, is installed as the Day 1 starter, and stinks up the joint while SB is sitting on the bench, then yes....I could see that creating some internal discord.

But if a high draft choice is used on a QB and installed as Day 1 starter and does well, I don't see the problem. Or if the draft choice is brought in but SB just outplays him in preseason, and the rook rides the bench for a while, no problem.

Quite frankly, I think players have a better ability to 'move on' than do most fans. They realize their best chance to win is in putting the best option on the field...regardless of their personal feelings about individual teammates. The discord starts if/when a player is given a job and does poorly while everyone and their uncle knows there's a better option already on the team. Personally, I don't see Snisher allowing that to happen.

 

[Ramathon]

QB's taken at the top usually play their first season. Might as well get the reps and let them learn on the job.

Depends on the team's situation. And I'm guessing is less likely to be true going forward than was the case when Bradford was drafted and in the 10 or so years prior when 1st round contracts just got obscene $$ with their rookie contract. I can remember when it was not at all uncommon for any position player (except RB) to ride the bench for at least a year or 2 before becoming starters. There was a time when that was the norm.

It got all turned around and out of whack when rookie contracts became so costly that NOT playing them, whatever their readiness to be productive, became more typical. But now that those rookie contracts are no longer breaking the bank again, I would not be the least bit surprised to see many position players, especially QB's, be allowed to 'develop' for some time prior to be thrown into the fire. It really should afford teams/coaches the ability to put the best players on the field, and not have the $$ play so large a role.

 

[ChrisW]

I've given him 5 years worth of chances. When is enough, enough? I have a strong feeling that's how most Rams fans feel as well. And I honestly think it would be very awkward to have the previous "leader of the offense" come in and backup a QB that we'll take high in the first round. Do the players in the locker room follow the rookie (who is going to be the QB of the future unless he sucks) or stick with Bradford? That kind of stuff divides a locker room.

I'd love to have him as a backup. I think it would be best for his career long term as well. Sign him for one year, let him compete with a new draft pick and if he loses the job let him hold a clipboard. The dude needs a full year's rest now after the surgery to make sure everything is fully healed. We'd also benefit from his game planning and insight, as I'm sure helped Clemens A TON last year.

 

[LACHAMP46]

It's not Long's fault. Tackles miss blocks sometimes. That, or every tackle Quinn faced is at fault for their QB getting sacked. And no, I'm not comparing Armanty Bryant to Robert Quinn. Just sayin'. It's part of the game. It was just an awkward hit with downward vertical force that caused a hyperextension. If Bradford had just gotten speared or shellacked instead of awkwardly fallen on, we wouldn't even be talking about this.

That's my point, in a way, Armonte Brown was all over the backfield against Long, and he's no Quinn. Quinn has gotten players benched....Think that's how Armstead got his position a lil quicker....but again, not blaming him for the injury, he was just there when it happened...It could be a problem down the line...Who's the new DE for Minnesota, Griffen? Guy from SC? He can play....