What Do You Make of Snead's Remarks?

  • 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.

Pancake

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 1, 2010
Messages
2,204
Name
Ernie
Bradford isn't the guy to lead the Rams IMO. I don't think it's smart to build your coming season around injury prone players. Saffold, Long, Bradford are all good players when healthy but history repeats itself way to often with them and then the Rams season takes a dive when they are lost. Saffold might work out but it seems like every game has a Saffold is down moment. It definitely won't bother me if these three are phased out. Hopefully with upgrades.

It's a bummer the way it's working out for Bradford. He has the tools to be a really great QB. Maybe he still will be. A lot of QB's take off later in their careers but I don't think it's going to happen for Bradford while with the Rams anymore.
 

Yamahopper

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,838
I don't think Bradford's salary has anything to do with the equation. That's a fans thing . It's more about who can stay on the field enough to help the team. The uncertainty of how long Bradford can play how much protection it takes to keep a QB healthy is dragging the team down.

And Les two words for you, Blake Bortles. He was yours.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Bradford isn't the guy to lead the Rams IMO. I don't think it's smart to build your coming season around injury prone players. Saffold, Long, Bradford are all good players when healthy but history repeats itself way to often with them and then the Rams season takes a dive when they are lost. Saffold might work out but it seems like every game has a Saffold is down moment. It definitely won't bother me if these three are phased out. Hopefully with upgrades.

It's a bummer the way it's working out for Bradford. He has the tools to be a really great QB. Maybe he still will be. A lot of QB's take off later in their careers but I don't think it's going to happen for Bradford while with the Rams anymore.
Ya know this is the single issue that I have allowed myself to question Fisher on , but FWIW I think GRob was the insurance policy on Long, he went out and got Davin Joseph ( can't win em all) and Hill to upgrade the BUQB in case Sam didn't make it.


Still you can only roll the dice so much, we did try to get back into the first round for Zac Martin as well , or was it someone else?

OHHH about Snead , open call to Sams agent ,were drafting or trading for your boy's replacement so get ready to renegotiate or be traded out of the conference.
 

Jumava1968

Starter
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
579
Name
Jumava
I think he brings Sam back at a reduced salary and if we happen to land in the top 5 picks he's going to pick up a quarterback.
 

Faceplant

Still celebrating Superbowl LVI
Rams On Demand Sponsor
2023 ROD Pick'em Champion
Joined
Aug 11, 2010
Messages
9,597
All the talk about Sam's shoulder coming out, but it was those Bambi like legs that always had me worried. Those, IMO are his weak link. Not much can be done for that unfortunately. Would love him back, but sheesh... Kinda tough to depend on at this point.
 

OC_Ram

Restricted Free Agent
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
1,085
Acl injuries have ended a great number of NFL Careers. We are talking about his 2nd acl injury to the same knee. I think he done. We be the fool not to draft a qb as priority #1.
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
I don't think Bradford's salary has anything to do with the equation.
I would have agreed with you up through this year.

But going into Bradford's final year with a $13 million dollar contract... even if you believe he could come back, it's just not economically responsible to risk paying him that much.
 

HometownBoy

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
3,527
Name
Aaron
That Sam is no longer the guy and that we're going into next season with a completely open QB contest. least it'll sate the QB watchers to have that media circus they always wanted. RamStalk will probably wet itself right up until the part where they don't get the QB the y wanted.
 

Yamahopper

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,838
I would have agreed with you up through this year.

But going into Bradford's final year with a $13 million dollar contract... even if you believe he could come back, it's just not economically responsible to risk paying him that much.
It's not a question of money. It's if Bradford can play 16 games next year.
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
It's not a question of money. It's if Bradford can play 16 games next year.
It's whether he can be counted on for 16 games AND money.

If he was willing to sign a $2-$3 million "prove it" contract (that would enable us to cut him easily if necessary) AND was willing to compete for the position, I'd love to have him back.
 

Yamahopper

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,838
It's whether he can be counted on for 16 games AND money.

If he was willing to sign a $2-$3 million "prove it" contract (that would enable us to cut him easily if necessary) AND was willing to compete for the position, I'd love to have him back.
Why would he do that?
Players don't take huge pay cuts in the last year of a contract. His agent already knows how much he can get and from what team. Only way that happens is he has no other offers.

The Rams would have no problem paying him if he was guaranteed to play 16 games at a high level.

Either they cut him before free agency to get cap space. Or sign him to a extension much like Dalton's prove it contract. It's all about guaranteed money which would be what he's scheduled to make next year.

Would you be comfortable cutting him after the season, not knowing what you can get in the draft?
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
Why would he do that?
Players don't take huge pay cuts in the last year of a contract. His agent already knows how much he can get and from what team. Only way that happens is he has no other offers.
My scenario here is assuming he gets no other offers. If he does get a better offer, I wish him the best in any game not against us. I still don't think he's a bad QB or drafting him was a mistake. I just don't think we're providing what every QB needs.

The Rams would have no problem paying him if he was guaranteed to play 16 games at a high level.
Agreed.

Either they cut him before free agency to get cap space. Or sign him to a extension much like Dalton's prove it contract. It's all about guaranteed money which would be what he's scheduled to make next year.

Would you be comfortable cutting him after the season, not knowing what you can get in the draft?
IMO, and I can agree to disagree on this if you want, the Rams MUST cut him. They CANNOT keep that kind of cap figure on the roster for that much recent injury history.

Could this mean we'd have no good options for QB next year? Possibly. But betting on Bradford's health is a big gamble at this point. I don't think anyone else is paying him $13 million for this year either.

Also, Bradford's salary next year is not guaranteed. Cutting him causes a "dead money" cap hit of just under $3.6 million as opposed to a cap hit of just over $16.5 million to keep him.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/st.-louis-rams/sam-bradford/
 

Yamahopper

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,838
My scenario here is assuming he gets no other offers. If he does get a better offer, I wish him the best in any game not against us. I still don't think he's a bad QB or drafting him was a mistake. I just don't think we're providing what every QB needs.


Agreed.


IMO, and I can agree to disagree on this if you want, the Rams MUST cut him. They CANNOT keep that kind of cap figure on the roster for that much recent injury history.

Could this mean we'd have no good options for QB next year? Possibly. But betting on Bradford's health is a big gamble at this point. I don't think anyone else is paying him $13 million for this year either.

Also, Bradford's salary next year is not guaranteed. Cutting him causes a "dead money" cap hit of just under $3.6 million as opposed to a cap hit of just over $16.5 million to keep him.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/st.-louis-rams/sam-bradford/

I wanted to cut him last year the second they drafted Bortles.

To me the money is nothing. It's about winning games.
It's one year non guaranteed.
It's not like the Rams can go out and sign a bunch of FA's with Sneeds first draft class having to be resigned after next season.

If They are comfortable with Davis or able to draft the guy they want it's see ya Sam.
If not then that's where it gets murky.
As i said earlier IF the Rams want him back and they can work a deal out it wouldn't be for more money, it would be guaranteed money and bonuses.
Less than he makes now over a short term deal.
Bradford still has the hammer. One he's rich, he's already had a huge contract. He can be picky. Second till the Rams get some better he's still a option.
But honestly I want to move on even if he's gonna play for free
No way he makes it more than a couple games behind that line. Talk about a money pit.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Sadly it's no longer about just next year and whether Sam can play 16 games guys ,the Rams need to believe he can play 40 of 48 games at this point and none of the missed games strung together in more than runs of two.
I hate like hell to say it , but we need to trade Sam and let a team that hasn't had to rationalize his injury history to it's fan base for the time we have to be the one who takes a chance on him. If we look in any way as if we are putting our eggs in that basket again and it goes south even the most loyal of fans will turn on this regime.
I personally turned on the last regime for playing a hurt Bradford trying to preserve their jobs when the season was lost totally irretrievable,and I have always thought it didn't make many points for them with the new owner .
Now with this regime , like the old one if they take actions that are taken because they want to keep their jobs their actions have to produce results consistent with the best interest of the team/org. or I won't be able to continue to support them .
JMO Sam has to be financially a low risk and a very solid plan in place to replace him should he get hurt again or we need to salvage something from him ,I think the lowest risk is to trade him and whatever first round choice we have to move up and grab the best QB we can in the draft not named Winston and with a decent head on his shoulders,if we can get him out of the conference that will be a bonus cuz something tells me Murphy"s law is gonna apply here if we keep him he'll get hurt if we trade him he'll make the pro bowl:cry:
 

theramsruleUK

Pro Bowler
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
1,079
Sadly it's no longer about just next year and whether Sam can play 16 games guys ,the Rams need to believe he can play 40 of 48 games at this point and none of the missed games strung together in more than runs of two.
I hate like hell to say it , but we need to trade Sam and let a team that hasn't had to rationalize his injury history to it's fan base for the time we have to be the one who takes a chance on him.

Trade sounds interesting, I'd prefer that to cutting him outright.
I think it's probably more likely we'll cut him though. Not sure if anyone will be willing to trade for a QB who's had 2 ACL injuries on the same knee in the space of a year

I just feel we need to move on from him now, whether its a trade or cutting. I don't think Davies is our saviour, but he's managed to push the ball downfield in the ways bradford hasn't really done before.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Trade sounds interesting, I'd prefer that to cutting him outright.
I think it's probably more likely we'll cut him though. Not sure if anyone will be willing to trade for a QB who's had 2 ACL injuries on the same knee in the space of a year

I just feel we need to move on from him now, whether its a trade or cutting. I don't think Davies is our saviour, but he's managed to push the ball downfield in the ways bradford hasn't really done before.
Before I'd cut him I'd bring him back with his contract as is. I would agree that the market for him will be limited and it would be very likely tied to a trade of our first to move up in the draft .
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
Sadly it's no longer about just next year and whether Sam can play 16 games guys ,the Rams need to believe he can play 40 of 48 games at this point and none of the missed games strung together in more than runs of two.
I hate like hell to say it , but we need to trade Sam and let a team that hasn't had to rationalize his injury history to it's fan base for the time we have to be the one who takes a chance on him. If we look in any way as if we are putting our eggs in that basket again and it goes south even the most loyal of fans will turn on this regime.
I personally turned on the last regime for playing a hurt Bradford trying to preserve their jobs when the season was lost totally irretrievable,and I have always thought it didn't make many points for them with the new owner .
Now with this regime , like the old one if they take actions that are taken because they want to keep their jobs their actions have to produce results consistent with the best interest of the team/org. or I won't be able to continue to support them .
JMO Sam has to be financially a low risk and a very solid plan in place to replace him should he get hurt again or we need to salvage something from him ,I think the lowest risk is to trade him and whatever first round choice we have to move up and grab the best QB we can in the draft not named Winston and with a decent head on his shoulders,if we can get him out of the conference that will be a bonus cuz something tells me Murphy"s law is gonna apply here if we keep him he'll get hurt if we trade him he'll make the pro bowl:cry:
Much as I like Sam, I don't see him as having any trade value at this point. No team is going to take on his current contract, and if the Rams want to do any kind of re-sign and trade deal, Sam would be better off refusing because then he can pick his situation and might make a better salary if a team doesn't have to give us compensation.

And sadly, your last sentence there is a huge fear of mine too.