Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1

[GusFrerotte]

Shit, we need linemen of the highest caliber, not some hot shot Qb from a NCAA powerhouse that is totally overhyped. Come on now fellas, Oklahoma is a bigtime college football powerhouse that with the exception of playing Texas, T Tech, and a resurgent Nebraska, plays markedly inferior opponents just about every week. Their out of conference games are a total joke. A better than average QB could excel when you have the deck stacked in your favor. What is going to happen when Mr Bradford faces PARITY? If he is a future Ram, he is screwed since they suck. If he is a future Skin, he is better off, but is still going to face opponents that are evenly matched to his team. Think about this. Since the late 80's/early 90's1 only 3 Qbs that have garnered a ton of publicity(hype) from NCAA Div 1 A football have made a major impact in the NFL: Aikman, Peyton Manning, and McNabb. All 3 from good solid teams, but not the uber powerhouses. They faced tougher competition being on second tier teams, with less talent to back them up. Brees garnered some hype out of Purdue, but nothing like Bradford or McCoy are receiving. Same with Favre, Rivers, and Brady. All 3 solid QBs from the second tier(well Univ of Mich wasn't second tier back then) who faced superior opponents often or at least a lot of teams on par with them in terms of talent. I know the Big Ten is weak now, but when Brady was at Michigan it was still regarded as on par with the SEC as the premier conference in college football. The Big 12 was also weak this year in terms of overall competition.

[GusFrerotte]

With that being said I don't think Brdofr is necessarily overrated in terms of ability, just I think his value is way overhyped. We need to get 3-5 linemen in the next two drafts of starting caliber and keep some of the present line for depth, but we need to get some studs in here. With a great line guys like Sean Canfield, Bill Stull, or even Kafka or Elliot could do well. Not to forget Lefevour or Sheehan from the MAC. We can get these guys in the middle to later rounds establish a solid line and in 2-3 seasons dominate. There are a ton of very good QBs out there. Why limit ourselves to just two possible selections?

[The Goat]

It doesn't seem like d tackles typically make a huge impact early on (regarding Suh). I don't think they "bust" like other positions, but for instance Raji fought through injury and just struggled to make an impact overall. Okoye (?) is sort of a similar story w/ the Texans. It really seems like it takes a few years for tackles to learn the tricks of the trade, the details, to become really dominant.

So I kind of see drafting Suh and Bradford similar in that you should expect a similar path of success...not immediate excellence. A team should draft on need all else being equal, and the Rams badly need a QB unless they try to build something about Vick or whatever.

[skinsfaninok]

Hey Gus, are Miami , cincinatti , fsu and byu jokes? Lol OU actualy plays a very good out of conference schedule if u knew your facts. Not To mention they play in the 2nd toughest conference in the country.. Unlike the weak ass big 10 or PAC 10.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Hey Gus, are Miami , cincinatti , fsu and byu jokes? Lol OU actualy plays a very good out of conference schedule if u knew your facts. Not To mention they play in the 2nd toughest conference in the country.. Unlike the weak ass big 10 or PAC 10.

I was with you up until that last sentence. I think the PAC-10 will officially overtake the SEC in terms of quality, or at least perceived quality, within the next year or two. Cal, Stanford, Washington, USC, UCLA, Arizona State, Oregon State, and Oregon are all quality programs right now with a few of those teams eying the possibility of a national championship. All those programs have great coaching, with the exception of USC who is loaded with talent anyway. The only teams in that conference that really stink are Arizona and Washington State.

Originally Posted by The Goat

It doesn't seem like d tackles typically make a huge impact early on (regarding Suh). I don't think they "bust" like other positions, but for instance Raji fought through injury and just struggled to make an impact overall. Okoye (?) is sort of a similar story w/ the Texans. It really seems like it takes a few years for tackles to learn the tricks of the trade, the details, to become really dominant.

Where did you hear all that stuff about Raji? Raji's play at the nose was considered a focal point in Green Bay's ability to transition to the 3-4 so quickly. And Okoye? Okoye came on very strong but has since played average at best. 5.5 sacks in year one compared to 2.5 sacks over the last two years.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Lets be realistic, when your starting a franchise, what should you draft? QB OR DT? Let me think.... O yea QB. Hell we have the best DT in the league and you saw what it got us (4-12). Point is everything starts with a QB, yes even Oline. If you don't have a QB (Vikings before Favre), you won't be real successful.

I don't think I'd build my O-Line around a player like Colt Brennan, but I'm open to the idea that this is only because he wasn't drafted high enough.

[tootergray34]

gosh do your homework guys...Clausen is the #1 rated QB in this draft.

[Luxorreb]

I want Okung. Bad.

[LandrySlice]

I want a Blumpkin, followed by Okung... Davis sounds like a little bit of trouble.

[skinsfan69]

I haven't seen a lot of Bradford but he seems similar to Bulger. I think Bulger can play but it seems that he just doesm't have enought pieces around him. Perhaps like JC he just needs a change of scenery.

[mooby]

Anybody thought about Bradford's possible chemistry with Malcolm Kelly? I'm not certain of this but I believe Bradford was a freshman the year before Kelly went pro. If they had a nice chemistry on the field that could mean good things for both Bradford if we end up picking him and for Kelly. Even though I like Campbell I definitely wouldn't mind taking Bradford.

[SmootSmack]

Reading some of these posts just brings painful reminders of 2003. We had a strong offensive line back then (couple of 1st rounders, couple of 3rd rounders, Randy Thomas who I think was a 2nd rounder) yet we couldn't win with Shane Matthews and Danny Wuerfful...which is ridiculous because with that line those guys should have been franchise QBs.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by mooby

Anybody thought about Bradford's possible chemistry with Malcolm Kelly? I'm not certain of this but I believe Bradford was a freshman the year before Kelly went pro. If they had a nice chemistry on the field that could mean good things for both Bradford if we end up picking him and for Kelly. Even though I like Campbell I definitely wouldn't mind taking Bradford.

Honestly, I wouldn't be all that surprised if Kelly isn't on the roster come the fall. Seems like some teams have been asking about him and he might be thrown in to help make a deal happen.

[irish]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Reading some of these posts just brings painful reminders of 2003. We had a strong offensive line back then (couple of 1st rounders, couple of 3rd rounders, Randy Thomas who I think was a 2nd rounder) yet we couldn't win with Shane Matthews and Danny Wuerfful...which is ridiculous because with that line those guys should have been franchise QBs.

Good point Smoot, of course O line is important (heck, every aspect of a team is important) but the NFL is a QB league and without a top flite QB a team just cant be successful. 2003 is an excellent example of this.

[SmootSmack]

Of course it's still possible Campbell ends up being the guy. Redskins won't just give him away and they were talking contract extension with his agent back in November/December (talks which apparently are picking up again).

All that said though, my own gut feeling is there won't be a contract extension and Campbell will be traded before the draft