McCoy, Suh, Bradford

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
It was all about Suh v Bradford in 2010 draft. Turns out Suh wasn't even the best DT. According to PFF, McCoy is head and shoulders better than Suh. They consider the 3 best defensive players in the NFL to be Watt, McCoy, and Quinn. And they also said that if McCoy played for a good team he'd be the DPOY. They did say that Quinn could get the award if the Rams continue their surge.

I do remember Casserly and McShay saying McCoy was better than Suh, but were we listening to them?

My point is that all those Suh over Bradford guys, couldn't even get the DT right. Heck, I remember some of them saying they'd go nuts if we took McCoy.

So it should not have been Suh or Bradford, if anything it should have been MCCoy or Bradford. And no one was down with that.
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
history now, Bradford is our QB
train

Yup. But it's something to consider in our next draft when we are looking at Matthews and Watkins. Matthews and Watkins may not even be the best players at their respective positions.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Sorta like RG and Reggie Bush and Ryan Leif, but ya know Sam is not materealzing to be the guy you can't not pick either
disclaimer: I'm fine with Sam, but ANYONE who suggested he might not be the unquestioned talent or worth risking in view of the shoulder to BE THE #1 was apprised "if you pass on him, you know nothing about this game", which of course is fair when it comes to ME, but I still don't like to hear it:wink:
 

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
21,605
Sam was the right pick. QB is the most important position on the team and the Rams didn't have one. Plus the other options weren't good. who could the Rams have chosen since that would be better, assuming they don't pick #1 overall after that? Were there any QBs that are better than Bradford in the following draft? Kaepernick was not ready to start from the 2011 draft. The team would have ended up with a Ponder, or Gabbert or something like that.
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
Sam was the right pick. QB is the most important position on the team and the Rams didn't have one. Plus the other options weren't good. who could the Rams have chosen since that would be better, assuming they don't pick #1 overall after that? Were there any QBs that are better than Bradford in the following draft? Kaepernick was not ready to start from the 2011 draft. The team would have ended up with a Ponder, or Gabbert or something like that.

That's a good point. Unless they had the #1 overall pick and chose Cam Newton, they weren't getting a QB who was going to come in and play well enough. They probably would have taken Gabbert, Locker, or Ponder, who were the other 3 first round QBs. Not a good solution. And even worse than that, they would have missed out on Robert Quinn.

So a cute hypothetical question is....

Who would you rather have Suh and Ponder or Bradford and Quinn.

Anyone?
 

duckhunter

Starter
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
908
Holmgren said he was offering a boatload of picks for Bradford. It would have been nice to know for comparison purposes what the offer was.

Heck, we even needed new ticket takers and equipment managers.
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,082
Name
Burger man
I've never understood the whole Bradford/Suh debate.

(1) There are a few positions in the NFL that you just don't draft #1 overall. Place kicker, punter, safety, and I'd argue DT is pretty close to taboo as well... because...

(2) If people think Bradford's contract - a guy who touches the ball every snap - is too high... how about paying $50M for an unproven defensive tackle? Which ties into point 3...

(3) The dynamic of rookie contract's in Bradford's class was outrageous. For the most part, only a QB could possibly be worth #1 overall money back then.

And lastly...

(4) The Bradford bashers can't bring to the table a single SOLUTION for replacing him. Seriously? Outside of Andrew Luck (who sort of looks sketchy at the moment... and was never an option for us) who else could we have? RG3 (yeah that's working out well)?

I just roll my eyes at anyone who thinks there was a better option than Bradford then, since, and now!
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
I've never understood the whole Bradford/Suh debate.

(1) There are a few positions in the NFL that you just don't draft #1 overall. Place kicker, punter, safety, and I'd argue DT is pretty close to taboo as well... because...

(2) If people think Bradford's contract - a guy who touches the ball every snap - is too high... how about paying $50M for an unproven defensive tackle? Which ties into point 3...

(3) The dynamic of rookie contract's in Bradford's class was outrageous. For the most part, only a QB could possibly be worth #1 overall money back then.

And lastly...

(4) The Bradford bashers can't bring to the table a single SOLUTION for replacing him. Seriously? Outside of Andrew Luck (who sort of looks sketchy at the moment... and was never an option for us) who else could we have? RG3 (yeah that's working out well)?

I just roll my eyes at anyone who thinks there was a better option than Bradford then, since, and now!

I agree with you. But I will offer an option.

They could have traded the Bradford pick to Cleveland or Washington and got a bunch of picks, then picked up a bunch of QBs and hope one would turn out ok.

But even with that, they unlikely would have the RG3 pick. So it all turned out for the best that they picked Bradford.
 

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
17,847
I was a big Gerald McCoy fan. He was/is the more versatile DT, has better technique, and can play all over the DL. Also Geno Atkins was in that same draft, and he's the best of the 3 IMO.

Geno Atkins > Gerald McCoy > Ndamukong Suh

The Lions may have Ndamukong Suh, but we have a Hulk!
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Not sayin' nor would I that Sam was a bad pick, but I am saying that making definitive declarations that he was a must pick is not true,how we are doing without him, how KC is doing with Alex Smith all says while it's nice /great to have an elite level of talent at QB, it's not an absolute necessity and if we'd built this team differently it wouldn't necessarily be a mistake
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,079
I've never understood the whole Bradford/Suh debate.

(1) There are a few positions in the NFL that you just don't draft #1 overall. Place kicker, punter, safety, and I'd argue DT is pretty close to taboo as well... because...

(2) If people think Bradford's contract - a guy who touches the ball every snap - is too high... how about paying $50M for an unproven defensive tackle? Which ties into point 3...

(3) The dynamic of rookie contract's in Bradford's class was outrageous. For the most part, only a QB could possibly be worth #1 overall money back then.

And lastly...

(4) The Bradford bashers can't bring to the table a single SOLUTION for replacing him. Seriously? Outside of Andrew Luck (who sort of looks sketchy at the moment... and was never an option for us) who else could we have? RG3 (yeah that's working out well)?

I just roll my eyes at anyone who thinks there was a better option than Bradford then, since, and now!
First overall? QB, LT, pass rushing DE….that about completes the list for me.

Your 4th point is really the one that matters to me. I have talked to Ram fans and the best option has been drafting a kid. So, in reality, the best option is drafting a guy and investing a couple of years and HOPING he gets to where Bradford is now. That is not a good option.
One thing that could be a positive with Bradfords' injury is we are seeing how close this team is. With a forced refocusing of the offense we can see the cat can be skinned more than one way. Washington looks they have completely given up and are the walking dead. I dont expect them to win another game this year. There are only a couple of places I would go with a top five pick for this team. The only place on the O would be Oline, T. Defense I could see DT, LB or secondary all be viable. Or the ever popular trade down.
All of your other points are spot on as well.
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,079
Not sayin' nor would I that Sam was a bad pick, but I am saying that making definitive declarations that he was a must pick is not true,how we are doing without him, how KC is doing with Alex Smith all says while it's nice /great to have an elite level of talent at QB, it's not an absolute necessity and if we'd built this team differently it wouldn't necessarily be a mistake
Well, given the situation of the team. Bad QB situation, bad team and a first overall pick they could not deal (they did try) due to the salary implications it was sort of a no brainer. As stated before given the salary hit the only reasoned pick was a QB with that pick really.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Well, given the situation of the team. Bad QB situation, bad team and a first overall pick they could not deal (they did try) due to the salary implications it was sort of a no brainer. As stated before given the salary hit the only reasoned pick was a QB with that pick really.
So if as you say they tried to deal the pick and weren't able to do so ( that I say is as much a function of demanded price as being completely unable)it's a pretty good indication the Rams themselvs didn't think Sam was a no brainer pick,and no one with the wherewithal to move into position to pick him did either.
But once again the insistence that the cat MUST be skinned this way, won't ever fly with me.
One of the best no picks I've seen was Houston refusing to draft Reggie Bush and opting for Mario Williams and neither set the world on fire,ADD TO THAT the acknowledged paradigm that choosing the wrong "franchise " QB sets a franchise back worse than the wrong DT because the QB is always given more time to become the answer and often plays ahead of someone even outsiders believe would produce better ( as in RG and Cousins)
 

moklerman

Warner-phile
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
2,185
That all Rams fans aren't in love with Bradford is a shame. When you look at all the other supposed stud QB's who are "clearly" better than Bradford play under similar circumstances, you see how much they struggle. Bradford has performed under really crappy conditions for quite a while and still keeps improving. Put Andrew Luck on the 2010-2012 Rams and he's no one's wunderkind. RGIII? He's practically worthless at this point.

And I agree with CGI, if the Rams had drafted Suh and given him the money Bradford got, I'm confident most of the fanbase would hate him by now. There's no way for a DT to live up to that contract. Especially one with a questionable attitude.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
So if as you say they tried to deal the pick and weren't able to do so ( that I say is as much a function of demanded price as being completely unable)it's a pretty good indication the Rams themselvs didn't think Sam was a no brainer pick,and no one with the wherewithal to move into position to pick him did either.
But once again the insistence that the cat MUST be skinned this way, won't ever fly with me.
One of the best no picks I've seen was Houston refusing to draft Reggie Bush and opting for Mario Williams and neither set the world on fire,ADD TO THAT the acknowledged paradigm that choosing the wrong "franchise " QB sets a franchise back worse than the wrong DT because the QB is always given more time to become the answer and often plays ahead of someone even outsiders believe would produce better ( as in RG and Cousins)

Rams thought it was a no brainer pick, and other teams offered a lot of picks for him though. They said no because they wanted Sam. When they could have taken the bounty and grabbed other QB's that pople thought were viable ooptions then.
 

The Rammer

ESPN Draft Guru
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
2,400
Name
Rick
I love threads where people post hindsight 20/20 stuff " I knew this and that" No you didn't, if you did you'dwork for a NFL team....
 

duckhunter

Starter
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
908
I was a big Gerald McCoy fan. He was/is the more versatile DT, has better technique, and can play all over the DL. Also Geno Atkins was in that same draft, and he's the best of the 3 IMO.

Geno Atkins > Gerald McCoy > Ndamukong Suh

The Lions may have Ndamukong Suh, but we have a Hulk!

I liked the Atkins kid too because he just made so many plays but everyone and their brother said he was too short. To me the tape and stats is more important than measurables. Heads up competition seems like one of the best indicators.

The media and talking heads sway opinion too much.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
I love threads where people post hindsight 20/20 stuff " I knew this and that" No you didn't, if you did you'dwork for a NFL team....

That's not exactly true. There have been a number of circumstances where fans got it right. Difference is that fans rarely remember the ones they got wrong.

For example, I don't work for a NFL team but in the 2012 Draft, I was adamant that we should have picked Alshon Jeffery over Brian Quick and Lavonte David over Isaiah Pead.

Jeffery is developing into a very good NFL WR and is on pace for 1000+ receiving yards this year. Lavonte David is very arguably the best young 4-3 LB in the NFL today. We'll see about Quick, his book isn't written yet. I think Pead's is. Regardless, as it stands now, it appears I got it right...even though Snead has done a good job drafting thus far.

However, I also got it wrong in the 1st round when I wanted David DeCastro over Michael Brockers.

So yea, we tend to remember our triumphs but forget our short-comings. I have a decent success rate overall(an amazing success rate with WRs) but I still don't think I know more about the game or scouting or am better than Les Snead. That all said, it's still a game of guesswork and sometimes, you end up getting it right when the NFL guys don't.

As far as Max's post, I don't think he was using hindsight. Only saying those that thump their chest about Suh in hindsight actually made the wrong pick. I know Ramzee(I'm not sure if he posts here) was one of the few that preferred Gerald McCoy to Suh.