Dude, bradford hasn't started a real game in over a year right now. To think he'll come back and light it up is a bit crazy. He might be better than what we have now, but we still need to look at more options in the offseason.
St. Louis Rams: Bringing Back Bradford?
- Thread starter Robocop
- Start date
-
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.
Exactly my point. Some people just don't get it. A healthy Bradford is much better than anything we have going now.
I agree with you 100% Worst case, Bradford is injured again (probable) or doesn't perform well (I doubt this) and Davis/Hill or our Rookie takes over. Best case, Bradford comes back and thrives, thus making him a huge trade chip.
Who said anything about planning the future with Bradford? You bring him back because he will be your best starting option at QB next year unless he is outshined by the rookie, and this is assuming Bradford takes the pay cut. If he doesn't, then adios. If he stays healthy at a reduced rate, then what? Exactly.
I don't see why not. It's a painful conversation and conjecture but I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that we beat AT LEAST Dallas and Arizona with a healthy Sam Bradford.
Hell, we might have even beaten San Francisco(first game) or Philly.
This is a different team with better QB play.
I think at this point, we need to convince Bradford to take a pay cut. Because the options in the draft are really questionable. But we need to have a Plan B ready. A better Plan B than we had this year. Whether that's a rookie QB or a FA signing like Kyle Orton.(like Orton...not necessarily Orton)
cgsuddeath
Rookie
Won't happen.We gave up 6 sacks.Davis cracked under pressure and no quarterback can continue under those circumstances.
mr.stlouis
Legend
Agreed, we have zero leverage to take money out of his pocket. If he stays healthy all year, anything not IR, he'll get a health based extension. Shoot, I think he's gonna get an extension based on health, anyway.
There are a good deal of QBs that could have handled the circumstances well today for the Rams.
Are you talking about Bradford here? Rams have zero leverage? How do you figure that?
The Rams certainly have some leverage.
An extension based on health...? Lack of health i'm assuming right? I'm confused Mr St Louis.
mr.stlouis
Legend
Yes, Sam has leverage on us because we have no option better than him, talent wise. I see what you're saying, now.
Play or don't get paid contract.
the rams have zero leverage. They have nothing at qb. The more games Davis plays their leverage goes into negative territory.
.
The Rams have the leverage that NOBODY is going to pay Bradford the figure on his contract, so as long as he's going to take a paycut anyway, he might as well stay here and do it.
Bradford has leverage but we also have leverage. With him coming off two torn ACLs, who knows what he'll get on the open market. He might only get a prove it deal at like ~$5 mil a year.
The Rams do have leverage to ask him to take a pay cut because I don't think any team is going to give him $10 mil a year. Bradford is set to get paid a base salary of around $13 million next year. I think Bradford's market value estimate is likely in the $7 million range with his injuries. Could be less, could be more.
So logic would dictate that if the Rams want to keep him but don't want to pay him $13 million and Bradford wants to stay but also doesn't want to get paid less than his perceived market value...the pay cut they could bargain for would be between $7 million and $13 million.
This is line of logic is similar to the Coase Theorem for all those economists out there.
I'm sure his agent will snoop around and work out if there is a market out there for sam before they start talking about next season.
.
mr.stlouis
Legend
Bradford has leverage but we also have leverage. With him coming off two torn ACLs, who knows what he'll get on the open market. He might only get a prove it deal at like ~$5 mil a year.
The Rams do have leverage to ask him to take a pay cut because I don't think any team is going to give him $10 mil a year. Bradford is set to get paid a base salary of around $13 million next year. I think Bradford's market value estimate is likely in the $7 million range with his injuries. Could be less, could be more.
So logic would dictate that if the Rams want to keep him but don't want to pay him $13 million and Bradford wants to stay but also doesn't want to get paid less than his perceived market value...the pay cut they could bargain for would be between $7 million and $13 million.
This is line of logic is similar to the Coase Theorem for all those economists out there.
I'm all for it if it works out like that. The money we'd save from him and Long could fetch a darn good OG like... IUPATI! Oh wouldn't that be sweet!
Totally disagree with you guys. It's not like Sam has been here throwing TD's, putting up Wins...or even been a "good" QB here in terms of other QB's around the league(with all due respect to Sam, who i like and think can be good). Add to that he is an absolute mess health-wise.
He's now a health project, as well as being a QB who hasn't quite put it all together on the field. Sorry, i just think any subjective view would take one to that contention. The Rams would be doing Sam a favor if they let him come back, be named the starter and play one more year under his current contract.
Everything changed once Sam re-injured his knee. He hasn't played in a game that matters since October of last season.
As far as the Rams having no leverage because we have nothing at QB?....Sam is part of that Nothing at QB right now. There is free agency, the draft, trades...Bradford holds NO ONE hostage right now. The Rams are in a position to DECIDE who they want to play QB in 2015.
Exactly. Sam is a guy that teams might want to "take a flyer on" at this point. I hope it's us. It's sad...it sucks, but i'm not sure how that isn't pretty clear.
.
like i said, sam's agent will work out if there is a market out there for him. if there is then the rams will have to pay up. that is if they actually want him back. if there isn't then the rams will have leverage.
btw, dalton and cutler are getting $18m+ per year. $13m for sam is a freaking bargin if the rams feel his knee is good to go.
.
like i said, sam's agent will work out if there is a market out there for him. if there is then the rams will have to pay up. that is if they actually want him back. if there isn't then the rams will have leverage.
btw, dalton and cutler are getting $18m+ per year. $13m for sam is a freaking bargin if the rams feel his knee is good to go.
.
I agree with this. We have Bradford who could very well be damaged goods and has yet to put it all together on the field after 5 seasons and who will carry a $16.5mil cap hit next season....an old backup in Hill.......and Davis who has shown that he isn't a franchise QB.
Oh and Keenum.
We have nothing right now i agree. I believe there might be better and most certainly smarter options than Bradford in 2015.
If Sam's agent looked me(Demoff) in the eyes and said "We'd like an extension..." i'd say sure, we're going to release your client and would be very willing and eager to pay him a one or two year, incentive laden Kenny Britt-type contract(for a QB). If he stays healthy and plays really well he's our franchise guy once again.
Sam is part of the problem in relation to our QB problem. The only way the Rams would hold no leverage is if free agency started tomorrow.