2012 NFL Draft

Alright.... LMAO...I will agree to disagree at this point and move along. Because teams have invested in players may times over and they have cut/released/traded/benched for the cheaper version that can do the job.

It was done in Denver...and will be done many times over. Might be doen to Bradford in St. Louis in for the chance at Luck. He is the LAST of the #1 QBs for big money..I mean REAL big money. And/or ALSO to Manning, who is due to him by the Colts... in the tune of $28 million PLUS....but willing to ditch THAT to draft Luck.

But will move along...
the reality is that both point of views are correct. you have those who won't move on because of what they have invested in a player and wish to give it a little more time and you have those that will cut ties and move on if something better comes along. but rarely if ever will you see a team move on only after one season if the investment was big. in the case of the rookies that's history. like your example above with sam. some think the rams will draft a QB if a good one is available and some feel they won't because of what they have invested in bradford. you can't say either one is wrong. its just more of a wait and see thing. an example that favors your point of view is Russell. The Raiders decided not to waste anymore time on the guy despite the amount of money they paid him. that was the right move.
 
the reality is that both point of views are correct. you have those who won't move on because of what they have invested in a player and wish to give it a little more time and you have those that will cut ties and move on if something better comes along. but rarely if ever will you see a team move on only after one season if the investment was big. in the case of the rookies that's history. like your example above with sam. some think the rams will draft a QB if a good one is available and some feel they won't because of what they have invested in bradford. you can't say either one is wrong. its just more of a wait and see thing. an example that favors your point of view is Russell. The Raiders decided not to waste anymore time on the guy despite the amount of money they paid him. that was the right move.
oh and sorry to bring it up again. i'll leave it at that too. :eek:
 
If this has not been mentioned before(I said this in another thread),if the Rams do end up with the number 1 overall draft pick,& they can not get a good deal(as far as they are concerned) for it,I would not be surprised if THEY draft Andrew Luck. Going on past history with the Rams(including when they were the Los Angeles Rams),they just seem to love a good QB controversy,& they love to go through QB's,whether they are standouts or not,like a proctologist goes through disposable rubber gloves. It defies logic & common sense,but that's just how the Rams roll.
 
I think it's hard to say this with coaching uncertainty. They'll at least have a new defensive coordinator and that could completely make or break the team's chances by itself (is essentially why the team is in the position it is now, in addition to Palmer's 14 INTs). Before the offseason is over, they could bring in a GM, dump Hue, bring in a new coach, etc. While the Raiders have only a few draft picks, a lot of movement can be expected with that franchise this offseason.
i think the Head Coach will be back next season. salsa will be happy with a new DC for sure. i think the team will be back pretty intact. but thats my opinion. we may very well see what you mentioned as well. no one outside the organization really knows for sure.
 
If this has not been mentioned before(I said this in another thread),if the Rams do end up with the number 1 overall draft pick,& they can not get a good deal(as far as they are concerned) for it,I would not be surprised if THEY draft Andrew Luck. Going on past history with the Rams(including when they were the Los Angeles Rams),they just seem to love a good QB controversy,& they love to go through QB's,whether they are standouts or not,like a proctologist goes through disposable rubber gloves. It defies logic & common sense,but that's just how the Rams roll.

This would be interesting as then they could potentially trade Bradford and get more picks.

I can see it now, St. Louis gets Luck with 1st pick and trades Bradford to Indy, this way if Peyton is fine, theres no pressure to play Bradford (at least not as much).
 
In today's NFL high 1st round Running Backs are a waste of a pick. QB's, Lineman, edge rushers and secondary are much more important than running backs.
 
If this has not been mentioned before(I said this in another thread),if the Rams do end up with the number 1 overall draft pick,& they can not get a good deal(as far as they are concerned) for it,I would not be surprised if THEY draft Andrew Luck. Going on past history with the Rams(including when they were the Los Angeles Rams),they just seem to love a good QB controversy,& they love to go through QB's,whether they are standouts or not,like a proctologist goes through disposable rubber gloves. It defies logic & common sense,but that's just how the Rams roll.

I would be surprised. The Rams have invested WAY too much time and money into Bradford for them to give up on him that quickly.
 
In today's NFL high 1st round Running Backs are a waste of a pick. QB's, Lineman, edge rushers and secondary are much more important than running backs.

The return on your investment as a franchise isn't very good either. What is the average lifespan of an NFL RB? Something like 5 years?
 
I would be surprised. The Rams have invested WAY too much time and money into Bradford for them to give up on him that quickly.

Hence my comment

It defies logic & common sense,but that's just how the Rams roll.

We're not talking about a team with common sense,we're talking about the Rams. The Rams would have been done with Peyton Manning in a season or two before they moved on to the next QB "flavor of the month." Crap,how long did Roman Gabriel last with them?
 
The return on your investment as a franchise isn't very good either. What is the average lifespan of an NFL RB? Something like 5 years?

I think it's actually less than that, more like 3 years .... and the STUDS are the ones that are even pushing it that far.
 
Uh oh. Looks like Shurmur is already stirring the QB controversy pot in CLE. When asked about RG3: "RG3 is a tremendous talent. Good players at all positions fit any offense." -When asked if he fits the West Coast Offense the Browns have adapted.


 
Uh oh. Looks like Shurmur is already stirring the QB controversy pot in CLE. When asked about RG3: "RG3 is a tremendous talent. Good players at all positions fit any offense." -When asked if he fits the West Coast Offense the Browns have adapted.



RG3 is a junior who has not committed to the draft yet. In fact,if he has a legitimate shot to go to the London Olympics this upcoming August 2012 as a hurdler,he might not come out.
In fact,it would be interesting if ALL "eligible" junior QB's(including Andrew Luck) decide to join Matt Barkley & remain in school for another year. There's no "Cam Newton" true senior QB in the draft this year,so I'd say the 2012 draft will be a weak draft for QB's. 2013 however.......will definitely be the year of the QB.
 
Uh oh. Looks like Shurmur is already stirring the QB controversy pot in CLE. When asked about RG3: "RG3 is a tremendous talent. Good players at all positions fit any offense." -When asked if he fits the West Coast Offense the Browns have adapted.



Whats he suppose to say ?

No, we don't need a guy like him. ....
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)