Sam Bradford out for the season?

theENGLISHseahawk

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
9,977
Reaction score
0
According to Jason La Canfora, the Rams are bracing themselves for this news.

Two questions:

1. Can the Rams re-sign him if it's true? Has he shown anything remotely worthy of an extension so far? And can you go into next year playing on a one year deal, given it shows you have almost no faith in your franchise signal caller to re-up him the year before his enormous rookie deal expires? Let's remember, 2014 is the final year they get two first round picks... in a class deep with QB talent.

2. Is next Monday's game now an absolute 100% must win for Seattle? St. Louis has a legit pass rush, but if we want to make the Super Bowl you'd argue you simply HAVE to beat a Kellen Clemons run team even on the road.
 

MontanaHawk05

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
18,590
Reaction score
1,530
I don't see how Monday's game wasn't already a must-win..?
 

HawkWow

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Messages
6,740
Reaction score
0
Location
The 5-0
Wow. Too bad for both the Rams and Sam. No more dancing around the subject, STL. needs to grab a QB in this next draft....and they should be well positioned to find one.
 

Sarlacc83

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,109
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland, OR
1) No, but they'll do it anyway because they're the Rams.

2) Yes and no, because it's only week 8 and last year Seattle lost even when Bradford didn't throw a single TD. This Seattle defense didn't have trouble with Carson Palmer so I'm not worried about them against Clemens. However, they do it need to stay ahead because it's a divisional game, so it doesn't matter who is QBing.
 
OP
OP
theENGLISHseahawk

theENGLISHseahawk

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
9,977
Reaction score
0
MontanaHawk05":1lq2qlp3 said:
I don't see how Monday's game wasn't already a must-win..?

I guess I mean now it's even more so, if that makes sense.

Part of me believed we could see another game like last year versus the Rams where PC gets out-coached by Fisher, they play great defense and Bradford does enough. Now, I just can't see any way we can allow Clemons to beat us... even if he only has to 'do enough'.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
40,607
Reaction score
2,945
Location
Roy Wa.
Its a division game, no matter who it is behind center you don't get make up wins in the division. To bad Sam is hurt, I wanted to win this with him behind center if nothing else than to shut up Rams fans that posted earlier this year. That and beating a team without a excuse to use even if we are banged up as well.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
40,607
Reaction score
2,945
Location
Roy Wa.
The would be better off pulling Roman Gabriel or John Hadl out of retirement, or maybe Vinny Testerverde.
 

drdiags

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
10,682
Reaction score
1
Location
Kent, Washington
theENGLISHseahawk":8jcifej0 said:
Apparently the Rams have discussed signing Tebow as a replacement...

LINK: https://twitter.com/brian_mcintyre/stat ... 7956270080


Ouch! Maybe he provides them a spark?

Injuries are a mother. Look at the major ones today. Maybe Fisher has the team playing inspired ball next week? Long and Jenkins will want to make amends for their actions today.

Clemens could be just like Gus Ferrotte (I think, my memory again is fuzzy) was against the Seahawks the year he had the Rams on the goal line @EJD, a sneak away from winning?

Answers to your questions:

1 - I wouldn't but they may, since they came out so strong in supporting him prior to this year.

2 - Yes. Has the feel of a letdown with Bradford out. Get in, stay healthy and get better play from all units and get out. Could be a nasty game after the Rams play in Charlotte.
 

Smelly McUgly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
4,282
Reaction score
0
Location
God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwe
I can honestly say this without having to rely on hindsight: I knew that the "do we re-sign Bradford" dilemma would happen as soon as the Rams traded that #2 pick instead of just taking RGIII. It was a mistake to think that they could use the extra picks to build a team around Bradford. He's a low-level starter, Alex Smith without any of the past success, and it made more sense to try and trade up with the Colts to take Luck than it did to trade down for RGIII.

Thank goodness the Rams are idiots and RGIII isn't in our division. I bet they re-sign Bradford and waste another three or four years trying to win with him.
 

Largent80

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
36,653
Reaction score
5
Location
The Tex-ASS
I hope dude is ok. Damn, injuries are a bitch to all plans every year. that is why depth is not over rated. At QB however, there is a different standard.
 
OP
OP
theENGLISHseahawk

theENGLISHseahawk

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
9,977
Reaction score
0
Smelly McUgly":17rx2rte said:
I can honestly say this without having to rely on hindsight: I knew that the "do we re-sign Bradford" dilemma would happen as soon as the Rams traded that #2 pick instead of just taking RGIII. It was a mistake to think that they could use the extra picks to build a team around Bradford. He's a low-level starter, Alex Smith without any of the past success, and it made more sense to try and trade up with the Colts to take Luck than it did to trade down for RGIII.

Thank goodness the Rams are idiots and RGIII isn't in our division. I bet they re-sign Bradford and waste another three or four years trying to win with him.

The issue here is Bradford's contract, which would've been almost impossible to deal.

So the new regime in STL were kind of stuck. They had to believe in Bradford because of the contract handcuff, and kind of did what they had to do to try and make him a success.

Unfortunately he wasn't up to it. For me, they'd be better off cutting him at the end of the year... swallowing any left over money and drafting another guy. Cut your losses.
 

Smelly McUgly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
4,282
Reaction score
0
Location
God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwe
I think using Bradford's contract as an excuse is an easy way to not make a hard decision. If you think RGIII is a generational talent and Bradford won't amount to anything special, you take RGIII, especially considering that the rookie cap meant that you weren't ending up tying up half your cap in two QBs.

Maybe they didn't think RGIII was special or they couldn't get the Colts to deal the first pick to them, but using Bradford's contract not to make a hard decision about the QB position would be a copout in my view.
 

HawkWow

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Messages
6,740
Reaction score
0
Location
The 5-0
Manziel will be a Ram. Bank on it. He's much more a Fish type QB than Bradford and will be on the board when the Rams pick. He too will be interesting... until he gets broken ala Griffin.
 

HawkWow

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Messages
6,740
Reaction score
0
Location
The 5-0
davidonmi":2y1oyukd said:
HawkWow":2y1oyukd said:
T-Jack for Ogletree!
ha lol

Only in a perfect (Seahawk) world. ; )

I wanted Ogletree, despite the off field shenanigans, in a very bad way last April. Ultimately, he will be no stranger to Honolulu, IMO.
 
Top