The Master Vent Thread-Negativity Within-Enter at Your Own Risk

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

Detroit picked Stafford the year before so they didn't need a QB though. If they needed a QB and the Rams took Suh they would have been jumping too. Again show me in nfl history where nfl teams pass on franchise QB's with the #1 pick? If the Rams don't take Bradford they have no idea when they will get the chance to get a franchise QB. you can always find a stud DT with a later pick. see Aaron Donald, Brockers etc. QB'S not so easy to do later in the draft.

We had Detroit by the balls. We knew they and others wanted Suh. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what has to happen there. Only the Rams would blow an opportunity like that. Just as we did this year reaching on Robinson, but that's another story...

You keep throwing the term Franchise QB around. Is Russell Wilson a franchise QB? Tom Brady? Aaron Rodgers? Ben Roethlisberger? Drew Brees? I think you get the picture. Most starting QB's weren't taken #1 overall. In fact, I think there are 5 out of 32 who were taken #1. Pretty small % overall(16%).
As for being able to find a top DT later in the draft, not guaranteed HOF caliber. They come around once a generation. Its just as likely to find a starting/franchise QB past pick one as I've just proved.

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

and also Clowney was rated so much higher then Brotles its a different situation. no one expected Brotles to go #3 no way #1. bradford was in the #1 pick conversation for sure.

Yes, just as Suh was rated much higher than Sam. Same exact situation. Reaching for a pick is reaching for a pick. The only reason Sam was in the convo for that number one pick is because we were stupid enough to tell people who we were picking

 

[27mtrcougar]

Yes, just as Suh was rated much higher than Sam. Same exact situation. Reaching for a pick is reaching for a pick. The only reason Sam was in the convo for that number one pick is because we were stupid enough to tell people who we were picking

Sorry I disagree its not the same. Sam was not a reach? his college career easily made him a #1 pick. It was no surprise that the Rams took Sam. did any of the so called experts say it was a bad or shocking pick? no. If Bortles went #1 last year we still would be talking about it. But it proves my point how much nfl teams value a QB when they took him at #3. he wouldn't have been there in the 2nd rd so they took him.

 

[Retroram52]

now your getting it. the tape doesn't lie.

That's right Cougar. The tape doesn't lie. Even though it was a bad call, it wasn't Shottenheimer or anyone else throwing that bad pass. You pay a guy gobs of money and he effs up a simple pass. You need to take your man-love glasses off on this one.

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

Sorry I disagree its not the same. Sam was not a reach? his college career easily made him a #1 pick. It was no surprise that the Rams took Sam. did any of the so called experts say it was a bad or shocking pick? no. If Bortles went #1 last year we still would be talking about it. But it proves my point how much nfl teams value a QB when they took him at #3. he wouldn't have been there in the 2nd rd so they took him.

No, it did not make Bradford easily the number one pick, that's some revisionist history there. Suh was by far the number one rated player, there is no dispute on that either back then and especially now. There was no surprise when the pick came down because everyone already knew who we were picking(like I said earlier, idiots in charge). And yes. there were plenty that day saying we made a huge mistake with our pick.

Yes, if Bortles did go number one overall instead of Clowney we would still be talking about how it was a shocker. But keep in mind, Clowney was not rated near as high as Suh, so if they did take Bortles it would be shocking, but would have made sense after Clowney's very disappointing final season. Suh had no such concerns, the guy dominated. I'll say it again, Suh was a guaranteed superstar. When you have the chance at a guy who is GUARANTEED to dominate, you have to take him as opposed to a guy who MIGHT be a franchise QB.

 

[27mtrcougar]

We had Detroit by the balls. We knew they and others wanted Suh. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what has to happen there. Only the Rams would blow an opportunity like that. Just as we did this year reaching on Robinson, but that's another story...

You keep throwing the term Franchise QB around. Is Russell Wilson a franchise QB? Tom Brady? Aaron Rodgers? Ben Roethlisberger? Drew Brees? I think you get the picture. Most starting QB's weren't taken #1 overall. In fact, I think there are 5 out of 32 who were taken #1. Pretty small % overall(16%).
As for being able to find a top DT later in the draft, not guaranteed HOF caliber. They come around once a generation. Its just as likely to find a starting/franchise QB past pick one as I've just proved.

I realize you can get a QB later but I'm talking about when u have the #1 pick. And don't act like it's a common thing to land a Brady, Wilson , Rodgers type in the later rds. It's not. I'm not saying they shouldn't have picked Suh but teams don't pass up QB's when they have the first pick.

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

I realize you can get a QB later but I'm talking about when u have the #1 pick. And don't act like it's a common thing to land a Brady, Wilson , Rodgers type in the later rds. It's not. I'm not saying they shouldn't have picked Suh but teams don't pass up QB's when they have the first pick.

Its more likely to get a starting QB past the #1 overall pick as it is with the #1 overall pick. Just look around the league. Like I said, there are 5 #1 overall QB's starting, there are 32 teams in the league, you do the math.

 

[27mtrcougar]

No, it did not make Bradford easily the number one pick, that's some revisionist history there. Suh was by far the number one rated player, there is no dispute on that either back then and especially now. There was no surprise when the pick came down because everyone already knew who we were picking(like I said earlier, idiots in charge). And yes. there were plenty that day saying we made a huge mistake with our pick.

Yes, if Bortles did go number one overall instead of Clowney we would still be talking about how it was a shocker. But keep in mind, Clowney was not rated near as high as Suh, so if they did take Bortles it would be shocking, but would have made sense after Clowney's very disappointing final season. Suh had no such concerns, the guy dominated. I'll say it again, Suh was a guaranteed superstar. When you have the chance at a guy who is GUARANTEED to dominate, you have to take him as opposed to a guy who MIGHT be a franchise QB.

I don't think Suh had any more hype then Clowney. He was a 99 also. Sorry But NFL GM's seem to not agree with that way of thinking. You can't win without a quarterback in this league.

 

[27mtrcougar]

It's easy to say take BPA at 1 but if you need a QB teams always seem to take one even if not rated the highest on their board.

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

I don't think Suh had any more hype then Clowney. He was a 99 also. Sorry But NFL GM's seem to not agree with that way of thinking. You can't win without a quarterback in this league.

First of all, Clowney was not rated as high as Suh, that's a fact. No one called Clowney a sure fire HOFer like they did with Suh. Before he was drafted, they were saying to make room in Canton for Suh. No one has said that about Clowney, especially after his last year in college. They called him lazy, said he takes plays off, was over exaggerating injuries. He was rated a 99 his second to last season, not after his last season.

In one sentence you're saying Houston should have taken Clowney because he's the top player available. Then the next you say GM's don't agree with me and you can't win without a QB. If that's the case, shouldn't Houston have taken Bortles? or traded the pick and landed a top QB prospect? Just like Bradford, Bortles was graded as a franchise caliber QB, so its the same situation(of course you'll say otherwise). But somehow on this one you agree with the team taking the D-lineman. Just don't get it...

Of course you can't win without a QB, but overreaching with the number one overall pick isn't the way to solve the QB problem, it actually causes others. As we can all see, it hasn't solved our problems at all. If anything, it has caused more with his salary hamstringing our salary cap. If he was playing and leading us to wins it would be one thing, but we all know he hasn't been doing any of that, even when he's not hurt...

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

It's easy to say take BPA at 1 but if you need a QB teams always seem to take one even if not rated the highest on their board.

When you have the #1 overall, You take the BPA or you trade the pick, its that simple. If you need a QB that bad and none are good enough to take at that pick, you trade back a pick or two or three and still get the player you want. There are always teams willing to give up something to get that pick, especially for a special player like Suh.

 

[27mtrcougar]

Its more likely to get a starting QB past the #1 overall pick as it is with the #1 overall pick. Just look around the league. Like I said, there are 5 #1 overall QB's starting, there are 32 teams in the league, you do the math.

Yes but when do you have the number one pick you have to make a decision at #1

When you have the #1 overall, You take the BPA or you trade the pick, its that simple. If you need a QB that bad and none are good enough to take at that pick, you trade back a pick or two or three and still get the player you want. There are always teams willing to give up something to get that pick, especially for a special player like Suh.

Back then teams didn't trade up very much because of the money that went with the #1 pick. I don't think its as easy to find a trade partner as u say because you have to give up so much to do it. But it's a mood point anyway because the pick wasn't for sale because the Rams thought they had their QB. I can almost guarantee you the Texans would have loved a bunch of picks last year but didn't have any offers.

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

Also want to add, of the top 10 players taken in the 2010 draft, there are only three non pro-bowl players. Leading the pack, the #1 pick, Sam Bradford. The next 6 picks have all made it the the Pro Bowl at least once.

Yes but when do you have the number one pick you have to make a decision at #1


Back then teams didn't trade up very much because of the money that went with the #1 pick. I don't think its as easy to find a trade partner as u say because you have to give up so much to do it. But it's a mood point anyway because the pick wasn't for sale because the Rams thought they had their QB. I can almost guarantee you the Texans would have loved a bunch of picks last year but didn't have any offers.

Right, that's part of the problem. With a team in a losing spiral like we have been for years, the pick should always be for sale. Again, this team wasn't a QB from being a contender, we needed talent, serious talent and lots of it. When you have a special player like Suh available, there are always offers, even with the huge salary.

There are two little words you never pass up when it comes to stock tips, draft picks and hot women...Sure Thing.....

 

[Vitamike]

At the time, I would have been happy with either one (Sam or Suh)

So of course I was happy to get Sam.

I would have, as I have with Sam, supported and defended Suh instead if we had gone in that direction.

 

[ozarkram]

I wonder had Montana, Brady or Bradshaw or you fill in the blank had been dropped into the same situation as Bradford how things would have turned out. All things considered. Contrary to popular belief here. One player does not make a team. Names like Sayers, Butkus, Simms, Sanders even Suh prove this out. I wonder when the final chapter is written about Bradford if it will say bum player, bad pick. Or if maybe it will say squandered talent by bad management.

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

At the time, I would have been happy with either one (Sam or Suh)

So of course I was happy to get Sam.

I would have, as I have with Sam, supported and defended Suh instead if we had gone in that direction.

That's very fair...If Sam did his job to the level of his pick/contract, I don't think anyone here would have a problem. But when you don't take the BPA and the guy you do take instead struggles, makes it even worse. When everyone else drafted in the next six picks is a pro bowler, that stings even more.

As a life long Rams fan, I've also supported Sam. But I'm not going to sit there with blinders on four/five years later. Do I hope he turns it around this season? Hell yes!!!! but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[27mtrcougar]

Also want to add, of the top 10 players taken in the 2010 draft, there are only three non pro-bowl players. Leading the pack, the #1 pick, Sam Bradford. The next 6 picks have all made it the the Pro Bowl at least once.


Right, that's part of the problem. With a team in a losing spiral like we have been for years, the pick should always be for sale. Again, this team wasn't a QB from being a contender, we needed talent, serious talent and lots of it. When you have a special player like Suh available, there are always offers, even with the huge salary.

There are two little words you never pass up when it comes to stock tips, draft picks and hot women...Sure Thing.....

"The next six picks made the pro bowl"... But none were QB's

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

The position doesn't matter. To be selected to a pro bowl means you are at the top of your position in your profession which a #1 overall QB(like Bradford) should be at this point in his career. For example, Every team starts one QB, and (most start)two DT's, therefore its harder for a DT to make it since 32 vs 64. Keep in mind, each pro bowl team picks 3 QB's, so Sam has a 6 out of 32 chance to get selected(almost 20%). While a DT has less than 10% chance. So basically, as I've shown, Sam has a 1 in 5 chance of making it as a QB, and he still hasn't. Can't blame that all on the team around him. If he is so good, his peers and the fans would notice it and vote him in at least once.

 

[Vitamike]

That's very fair...If Sam did his job to the level of his pick/contract, I don't think anyone here would have a problem. But when you don't take the BPA and the guy you do take instead struggles, makes it even worse. When everyone else drafted in the next six picks is a pro bowler, that stings even more.

As a life long Rams fan, I've also supported Sam. But I'm not going to sit there with blinders on four/five years later. Do I hope he turns it around this season? Hell yes!!!! but I'm not holding my breath.

Tis true!

Spoiler

"Even then, some here think that Rookie class sucked, LOL!"

 

[27mtrcougar]

The position doesn't matter. To be selected to a pro bowl means you are at the top of your position in your profession which a #1 overall QB(like Bradford) should be at this point in his career. For example, Every team starts one QB, and (most start)two DT's, therefore its harder for a DT to make it since 32 vs 64. Keep in mind, each pro bowl team picks 3 QB's, so Sam has a 6 out of 32 chance to get selected(almost 20%). While a DT has less than 10% chance. So basically, as I've shown, Sam has a 1 in 5 chance of making it as a QB, and he still hasn't. Can't blame that all on the team around him. If he is so good, his peers and the fans would notice it and vote him in at least once.

your getting off topic. its not about if sam has worked out or not. it was about what NFL teams do at #1 when they need a QB. history has shown they will pick the QB because it is the most important position even if they have someone rated higher on their board. sam has been hurt so its kinda hard to really judge his potential.