Report: Colt McCoy to be traded or released

[duckhunter]

So would you rather have McCoy and Suh, or Bradford and Brockers?

I think the comparison (1st round picks to 1st round picks) would be Suh and RGIII.

Uh oh, flushed someone out.... Welcome to the board.

I guess a thousand comparisons could be made. My question was really just a jest.

I also would like to welcome you to the board. Great to have another poster with good insight.

 

[Thrawn]

If Joe Flacco deserves his contract, then Bradford deserves what he makes.

Flacco doesn't deserve his contract, and I believe it will set back the Ravens for years, but he did deliver them a bunch of playoff wins and a SB, so I can at least see the argument he earned his there. I'd do a breakdown of millions per playoff win between Flacco/Bradford, but unfortunately, dividing by 0 gives bad results.

 

[Thrawn]

So would you rather have McCoy and Suh, or Bradford and Brockers?

I think the comparison (1st round picks to 1st round picks) would be Suh and RGIII.

Uh oh, flushed someone out.... Welcome to the board.

I guess a thousand comparisons could be made. My question was really just a jest.

I also would like to welcome you to the board. Great to have another poster with good insight.

Sorry that my first post is in a Bradford argument though... I know better than to stick my head in the room, and did it anyway.

 

[JIMERAMS]

Personally, I've never understood that idiom. "Elevates the talent level around him." Or any other similar proclamation that's impossible to prove. "Elevates the play of those around him" is another one. Someone point me to any kind of substantive proof of that.

You can't.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK7U9UjGhuA[/youtube]

And not only can people not prove that statement, but why on earth would you want a team full of players that needed someone else to elevate their play. Tell you what. Every single guy on MY team better be willing and capable of elevating his own ass without needing someone else to do it FOR them.

Anyway. Sure Bradford needs to produce better. But let's not pretend for one moment that he's been given everything he needs to succeed up to this point. Or even half of what he needs. Nor should we try to talk ourselves into believing that his offensive line hasn't been absolutely decimated during his sophomore and junior years in the NFL. Or that he didn't lose almost every single receiver he had in 2010. And 2011.

Excuses? Sure, why not. Call 'em what you want. But the fact remains. It's not been an ideal situation for this dude. And because he's not "living up to his paycheck" or "earning his coin" is just the collateral effect of not having the tools necessary to do so. Say for instance the entire O-line fell down after every snap and every single receiver had one shoe filled with cement. Real QBs make it work anyway? Yeah. Okay. I know that was a ridiculous analogy, but still. It's only partly untrue.

2013 is the year of Sam. If not, then whatever. I'm sure Fisher and company are more than capable of making the determination as to whether or not Bradford is the Quarterback to take them to where they need to go. And it's completely evident that Fisher isn't tied to an owner that's going to make roster decisions for him either. Let's trust that what he's conveyed to us so far about Bradford is true. That he *is* a Franchise-caliber QB who hasn't had the chance to prove what he's capable of yet.

/rant

This x100

Never could understand why people think a QB elevates others. Another issue I have is people must not be watching how fast Sam has to get rid of the ball because of the breakdowns on the OL. Yes every once in a while he gets some time and every once in a while he misses his target. So does every other QB in this league. Everyone is excited we had no sacks the last couple of games but please go back and watch how fast Sam had to get rid of the ball, it was because of this that we didn't have any sacks then people bitch about throwing short all the time. JMO but I just don't understand why people don't see that.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Peyton Manning is considered the benchmark for "elevate others" ... He's won one SB.

Not so easy.


Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[DR RAM]

So would you rather have McCoy and Suh, or Bradford and Brockers?

I think the comparison (1st round picks to 1st round picks) would be Suh and RGIII.

You're right in a way but it's just not the right comparison to make. I understand you're not the one who originally made it. Too much of a butterfly effect though.

If we pick Suh and suck in 2010...we definitely pick a QB in the 2011 Draft. But if we don't suck more than the Panthers, we end up picking one of Blaine Gabbert or Jake Locker.

Sounds pretty terrible to me.

We made the right choice in 2010. I am glad we did.

You think Bradford has earned his coin? Just asking is all.

I don't think coin has much to do with it. He makes what the NFL paid at that time, but the beating that he's taken, he's probably earned every cent. Do you think Suh is worth almost the same money for not improving that defense at all? Nobody earned the kind of coin these players received before they changed the CBA.

 

[kurtfaulk]

So would you rather have McCoy and Suh, or Bradford and Brockers?

I think the comparison (1st round picks to 1st round picks) would be Suh and RGIII.

that''s not a comparison at all. all we can deal with are absolutes.

either the rams would have chosen suh at #1 and then taken either mccoy or clausen, then who knows what would have happened after that.

or the rams are where they are now, with bradford and brockers.

the rams are in a much better place now.

.

 

[Thrawn]

So would you rather have McCoy and Suh, or Bradford and Brockers?

I think the comparison (1st round picks to 1st round picks) would be Suh and RGIII.

that''s not a comparison at all. all we can deal with are absolutes.

either the rams would have chosen suh at #1 and then taken either mccoy or clausen, then who knows what would have happened after that.

or the rams are where they are now, with bradford and brockers.

the rams are in a much better place now.

.

My argument is that it really doesn't compare at all. Had we gone with McCoy or Clausen, we'd have had no real investment in them, and we'd have had the #2 pick in last year's draft to fill a spot. If we had McCoy or Clausen (on a 2nd or 3rd round contract) we'd have had no reason not to take RGIII. So I still see my comparison is valid.

 

[bluecoconuts]

So would you rather have McCoy and Suh, or Bradford and Brockers?

I think the comparison (1st round picks to 1st round picks) would be Suh and RGIII.

that''s not a comparison at all. all we can deal with are absolutes.

either the rams would have chosen suh at #1 and then taken either mccoy or clausen, then who knows what would have happened after that.

or the rams are where they are now, with bradford and brockers.

the rams are in a much better place now.

.

My argument is that it really doesn't compare at all. Had we gone with McCoy or Clausen, we'd have had no real investment in them, and we'd have had the #2 pick in last year's draft to fill a spot. If we had McCoy or Clausen (on a 2nd or 3rd round contract) we'd have had no reason not to take RGIII. So I still see my comparison is valid.

But who's to say we draft #2? How do we know some other team doesn't plummet and another team doesn't rise up, and maybe we pick 3 or 4? Or maybe we pick first... Never know.

Why I don't usually deal with hypothetical's. I'm happy with the pick, I didn't like Suh then, I don't like him now.

 

[-X-]

But who's to say we draft #2? How do we know some other team doesn't plummet and another team doesn't rise up, and maybe we pick 3 or 4? Or maybe we pick first... Never know.

Why I don't usually deal with hypothetical's. I'm happy with the pick, I didn't like Suh then, I don't like him now.

That's exactly right. It's a variant of the butterfly effect. If we don't pick EXACTLY the same guys, then history is not going to duplicate itself exactly. Suh could have added wins, or subtracted wins, or we could have kept Bulger for another year, or drafted someone else ENTIRELY different than McCoy or Clausen (Devaney didn't like either), or even sign a free agent to buy more time. It's safer to deal in absolutes.

 

[Faceplant]

Wow. Two butterfly effect references in one day. Ashton would be ecstatic. Seriously, there cannot be one reasonable person who can say that Sam has performed at even an above average level over his career. I still think he can, but I also call em as I see em. He makes incredible throws, that I think only a handful of QBs can make, but he also has the tendency to grow roots in the pocket and misses on too many short check downs, and we all know he LOVES the check down. It is simple. If the line performs this year, he has to improve. I don't want to hear about "weapons" anymore either. I think he will have the weapons he needs (including the OL) when we begin the season....and honestly, I think.....I PRAY, that he flourishes.

 

[DR RAM]

Wow. Two butterfly effect references in one day. Ashton would be ecstatic. Seriously, there cannot be one reasonable person who can say that Sam has performed at even an above average level over his career. I still think he can, but I also call em as I see em. He makes incredible throws, that I think only a handful of QBs can make, but he also has the tendency to grow roots in the pocket and misses on too many short check downs, and we all know he LOVES the check down. It is simple. If the line performs this year, he has to improve. I don't want to hear about "weapons" anymore either. I think he will have the weapons he needs (including the OL) when we begin the season....and honestly, I think.....I PRAY, that he flourishes.

We lost a Hall of Fame RB, and only have 3 receivers on the roster with only a total of 4 years cumulative experience between them, so you might not want to hear it, and I don't either BTW, but that doesn't make those statements false.

Being in a system for the first time in his career, and the improvements that he made last year, IMO, I for one, am not worried. He has elite talent. He needs to show it. We still need to protect him and supply the groundwork where he can be successful.

 

[Afro Ram]

Personally, I've never understood that idiom. "Elevates the talent level around him." Or any other similar proclamation that's impossible to prove. "Elevates the play of those around him" is another one. Someone point me to any kind of substantive proof of that.

You can't.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK7U9UjGhuA[/youtube]

And not only can people not prove that statement, but why on earth would you want a team full of players that needed someone else to elevate their play. Tell you what. Every single guy on MY team better be willing and capable of elevating his own ass without needing someone else to do it FOR them.

Anyway. Sure Bradford needs to produce better. But let's not pretend for one moment that he's been given everything he needs to succeed up to this point. Or even half of what he needs. Nor should we try to talk ourselves into believing that his offensive line hasn't been absolutely decimated during his sophomore and junior years in the NFL. Or that he didn't lose almost every single receiver he had in 2010. And 2011.

Excuses? Sure, why not. Call 'em what you want. But the fact remains. It's not been an ideal situation for this dude. And because he's not "living up to his paycheck" or "earning his coin" is just the collateral effect of not having the tools necessary to do so. Say for instance the entire O-line fell down after every snap and every single receiver had one shoe filled with cement. Real QBs make it work anyway? Yeah. Okay. I know that was a ridiculous analogy, but still. It's only partly untrue.

2013 is the year of Sam. If not, then whatever. I'm sure Fisher and company are more than capable of making the determination as to whether or not Bradford is the Quarterback to take them to where they need to go. And it's completely evident that Fisher isn't tied to an owner that's going to make roster decisions for him either. Let's trust that what he's conveyed to us so far about Bradford is true. That he *is* a Franchise-caliber QB who hasn't had the chance to prove what he's capable of yet.

/rant

I know the point of this post is that Bradford hasn't been given an ideal situation to succeed, but lets look at it for what it is.

He's a highly paid number one first round pick. People expect these players to come in and not only be impact players, but to be instant stars. In his defense he was the offensive rookie of the year. He had to deal with that idiot Josh Mc'Daniels his second year and the o-line has been over all pretty bad.

But, going into 2013 he has a lot of the pieces that he's been missing. A pro-bowl left tackle. A pro-bowl center and over all good depth on the offensive line. He will be in the second year in the same system.

With that being said, I personally don't think he still has the weapons to succeed yet. I'm not buying Quick as a full time starter just yet. Without Jackson I expect teams to blitz the heck out of Bradford until either the backs can prove they can run the ball consistently or Bradford can prove he can make constant plays that make those defenses pay for blitzing.

(Wait for it) BUT, this guy needs to start producing. He needs to be held by the same standards of any other qb in the league. I'm tired of falling in love with players and justifying a guys poor production. As fans I think we are too quick to protect certain players and we lose our objectivity.

Bradford has my full support. He will continue to get my full support until he proves otherwise. But, if doesn't start winning games these last two years of his contract the Rams have to consider looking at other options. And why not start now if an option is available? I wouldn't mind seeing a young guy like McCoy on the bench if he could be had cheap. Just my thoughts.

Also. You don't think a great player could impact the production of another player? What about when you praised the acquisition of Jared Cook and said how much more productive he would make Lance Kendricks? Just saying.

 

[Selassie I]

In case you haven't seen this masterpiece...

WARNING Fucking Bad Language


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITRfprh2Lmw[/youtube]

 

[brokeu91]

In case you haven't seen this masterpiece...

WARNING freaking Bad Language


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITRfprh2Lmw[/youtube]

At least he was sane and rational about it

 

[-X-]

Also. You don't think a great player could impact the production of another player? What about when you praised the acquisition of Jared Cook and said how much more productive he would make Lance Kendricks? Just saying.

Exactly right. Lance Kendricks could benefit from Jared Cook in the sense that he has another guy to take the pressure off of him. It's similar to how Laurent Robinson took off when he got sandwiched between Dez Bryant, Miles Austin and Jason Witten. That's markedly different than saying Sam Bradford (alone) should be able to make sub-par receivers better receivers. Or that he should elevate offensive linemen off of the IR list and/or make 3rd string linemen better linemen. The only thing Bradford can do to elevate anyone is his job. Throw 'em open.

I understand your point, and I agree with much of it. It's just that I've made a lot of videos of this team, and I don't see Bradford as the primary weakness. If I thought he was a Colt McCoy type, or a Blaine Gabbert type, I'd most certainly say so. Now that's not to say that he doesn't have flaws. Because he does. However, I haven't seen *any* consistency around Bradford in his career to date. Over 30 receivers and 25 linemen in 3 years is the very antithesis of continuity.

 

[Afro Ram]

I agree with what you said. I just think the kid gloves need to come off when it comes to evaluating Bradford.

I often forget how irrational many fans can be when it comes to evaluating players. (The video about aout the fan freaking out over Colt more than proves that point.) In the end it's about how many wins and loses you ended up with not how you got them.

My expectaions are for the Rams to make the playoffs this year, no more excuses. I guess we shall see...

 

[-X-]

I agree with what you said. I just think the kid gloves need to come off when it comes to evaluating Bradford.

I often forget how irrational many fans can be when it comes to evaluating players. (The video about aout the fan freaking out over Colt more than proves that point.) In the end it's about how many wins and loses you ended up with not how you got them.

My expectaions are for the Rams to make the playoffs this year, no more excuses. I guess we shall see...

I agree. And I think that's what Fisher and company are doing by fortifying the line and getting him some more offensive support. I think they want to turn him loose as well, and this would be an ideal time to really evaluate what they have. I think he'll do just fine, but like you said ..... we shall see.