How Sold are you on Bradford? (1 Viewer)

[ty247]

Like the title says, how sold are you exactly on Bradford?

Is he the real deal? Is he a future stud in the league?

Chime in and let's discuss him as a potential fantasy prospect.

 

[Donsmith753]

I'm all in. He's the real deal.

 

[Nagle2998]

I'm all in. He's the real deal.

I have to agree and the only thing that scares me even a little is the injuries last year but I think that has more to do with coming back to soon. I hope IF the Rams take him they let him sit a year while they build up that line so he doesn't get hit like Bulger and become scared to death like Carr. As far as talent I think he is better then Stafford, Ryan and Flacco.

 

[Donsmith753]

I'm all in. He's the real deal.

I have to agree and the only thing that scares me even a little is the injuries last year but I think that has more to do with coming back to soon. I hope IF the Rams take him they let him sit a year while they build up that line so he doesn't get hit like Bulger and become scared to death like Carr. As far as talent I think he is better then Stafford, Ryan and Flacco.

I think that the Rams will let A J Feeley bridge the gap, similar to what Tampa Bay did this year. Give Bradford maybe 6 or 7 games to learn the system and if the seasons lost (which it probably will be) let him have a go at starting.I could be totally wrong and they could throw him in like Sanchez and just rely on Jackson and the pass on 3rd Down.I'd probably go for the first option though.

 

[rzrback77]

I am on board with Bradford. I think that he can come in and be a difference maker at QB in his rookie season just like Ryan, Flacco, and Sanchez have been.

I do think that he will either be drafted by the Rams or the Redskins will trade up for his rights like the Giants did with Eli Manning. And I think that he will start at QB from the first game of his rookie campaign.

It will be interesting to see how far he falls in rookie dynasty drafts, as QBs are not hardly ever treasured as rookies.

 

[Wyld Stallyns]

98% sold

 

[The Real Hipster Doofus]

I like him better than any QB to come out the last 3-4 years. I am very confident that he will be a top of the line NFL starter, barring injury. I don't think the shoulder is an issue. I wish I would be able to add him on some of my teams but I don't think it will work out that I get him.

 

[Zoomanji]

He's the best QB in this draft

 

[thriftyrocker]

I think he's the #1 pick in 2QB leagues.

 

[ChargersOH]

His skillset and mechanics can't be argued with. However, if that's all it took, QBs wouldn't be in such heavy demand.

Playing behind the St Louis line lowers my confidence in him tremendously. He's used to playing behind that monster O Line in college

and not against college top tier Ds, let alone NFL calibre.

The only plus for him is the NFC West is by far the weakest division.

I'm 50/50 he'll be an NFL starter after his first contract is up. He could be an Aaron Rogers. He could also easily be a Tim Couch.

 

[Go deep]

I was sold last season, and thought he was better than Stafford, who i liked alot. His accuracy is incredible, thats something you cant learn. My only real concerns this year was the shoulder and arm strength. I dont want to get too caught up in yesterdays proday, but he looked bigger and stronger than i thought, and the shoulder seemed to be 100%. I was also impressed how he performed under the pressure, there were millions of dollars on the line for him yesterday, and he looked cool as they come. Bigger stronger Drew Brees? OK, maybe im getting ahead of myself, but if someone would have called Peyton Manning the next Dan Marino after before he was drafted im sure plenty of people would have laughed at that. I havnt been this excited for a QB since Peyton, the only bad thing is the Bills wont get him.

 

[Yenrub]

He's the best QB in this draft

While I agree I am not sold on him being above avg or great in the NFL

 

[phthalatemagic]

I was sold last season, and thought he was better than Stafford, who i liked alot. His accuracy is incredible, thats something you cant learn. My only real concerns this year was the shoulder and arm strength. I dont want to get too caught up in yesterdays proday, but he looked bigger and stronger than i thought, and the shoulder seemed to be 100%. I was also impressed how he performed under the pressure, there were millions of dollars on the line for him yesterday, and he looked cool as they come. Bigger stronger Drew Brees? OK, maybe im getting ahead of myself, but if someone would have called Peyton Manning the next Dan Marino after before he was drafted im sure plenty of people would have laughed at that. I havnt been this excited for a QB since Peyton, the only bad thing is the Bills wont get him.

I think he has a good chance to be the next great QB in the league, up there with Manning and Brees. Question to the people completely sold on him: Where would you take him in your dynasty rookie draft? In 1998, I'm sure many people took Ryan Leaf, Robert Edwards, Curtis Enis, Fred Taylor and Randy Moss before Manning. Or at least the conventional wisdom said so. Apart from arguably Randy Moss, has anyone been more important to a dynasty team than Manning? Fred Taylor put in a long and good career, but nothing like Manning's. So if you think Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, and you don't think any of the other guys (Bryant, Spiller, etc) are going to be top 3-5 all time at their positions, would you take him first overall? If not, why not? I would. I won't get a chance, but I certainly would.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I wouldn't put him ahead of Stafford; I would put him ahead of Sanchez, Flacco and Ryan. I think with Bradford it's almost all roses, but you have to remember how little we've seen of him. In college, he was arguably worse than Colt McCoy, who is an unimpressive prospect. OU has never produced an NFL QB, and while that doesn't mean much, it's worth remembering that lots of QBs have looked good there. He played in the B12 with a bunch of terrible defenses, and he had an enormous talent advantage. People knock Tebow for beating up inferior competition, and while I think the SEC is overrated, there's no doubt that SEC defenses are a lot tougher than B12 defenses. Look at OU's offensive talent in '08:

T Phil Loadholt (2nd)

G Duke Robinson (5th)

C Jon Cooper (UDFA- MIN)

G Brandon Walker (UDFA- HOU)

T Trent Williams (2010 1st)

TE Jermaine Gresham (2010 1st)

RB DeMarco Murray (2011 pick -- if not for injuries he'd be a first round guy)

RB Chris Brown (2010 late round pick)

WR Juaquin Inglesias (3rd)

WR Manuel Johnson (7th)

WR Quentin Chaney (UDFA - STL)

WR Ryan Broyley (2011 pick - could be a 2nd round guy)

Bradford was protected by a full line of NFL players, including two stud tackles. He was throwing to four explosive WRs and had two of the best RBs in college football. And he was playing under a great coach against outmanned competition. Against Florida, Bradford didn't implode, but he looked mortal.

The other way this argument goes is that even if you put 2008 Drew Brees on the 2008 Sooners, I'm not sure they're much better. How many points per game are they going to score? 60? 70? Well, OU topped 60 in five straight games in 2008 and topped 50 in four other games. So even with incredible talent, Bradford was doing incredible things. But I think a guy like Cutler might have been a "safer" pick in that you could see he was elite; he wasn't the product of anything but himself, as he was on a bad team playing against solid defenses. I like Bradford, but I can't say that I've got no reservations about him. The thing is, if you're the Rams, how many times are you going to be able to get a guy with his ability at his age? Unless you plan on being at the very top of the draft consistently, the answer is not very often.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I was sold last season, and thought he was better than Stafford, who i liked alot. His accuracy is incredible, thats something you cant learn. My only real concerns this year was the shoulder and arm strength. I dont want to get too caught up in yesterdays proday, but he looked bigger and stronger than i thought, and the shoulder seemed to be 100%. I was also impressed how he performed under the pressure, there were millions of dollars on the line for him yesterday, and he looked cool as they come. Bigger stronger Drew Brees? OK, maybe im getting ahead of myself, but if someone would have called Peyton Manning the next Dan Marino after before he was drafted im sure plenty of people would have laughed at that. I havnt been this excited for a QB since Peyton, the only bad thing is the Bills wont get him.

I think he has a good chance to be the next great QB in the league, up there with Manning and Brees. Question to the people completely sold on him: Where would you take him in your dynasty rookie draft? In 1998, I'm sure many people took Ryan Leaf, Robert Edwards, Curtis Enis, Fred Taylor and Randy Moss before Manning. Or at least the conventional wisdom said so. Apart from arguably Randy Moss, has anyone been more important to a dynasty team than Manning? Fred Taylor put in a long and good career, but nothing like Manning's. So if you think Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, and you don't think any of the other guys (Bryant, Spiller, etc) are going to be top 3-5 all time at their positions, would you take him first overall? If not, why not? I would. I won't get a chance, but I certainly would.

If you think Bradford's going to be as good as Manning, you're nuts. Bradford has a ceiling as high as Manning's and might possibly reach it if everything breaks right, but the odds of Bradford being the next Manning are about 1 in 100.

 

[Donsmith753]

I was sold last season, and thought he was better than Stafford, who i liked alot. His accuracy is incredible, thats something you cant learn. My only real concerns this year was the shoulder and arm strength. I dont want to get too caught up in yesterdays proday, but he looked bigger and stronger than i thought, and the shoulder seemed to be 100%. I was also impressed how he performed under the pressure, there were millions of dollars on the line for him yesterday, and he looked cool as they come. Bigger stronger Drew Brees? OK, maybe im getting ahead of myself, but if someone would have called Peyton Manning the next Dan Marino after before he was drafted im sure plenty of people would have laughed at that. I havnt been this excited for a QB since Peyton, the only bad thing is the Bills wont get him.

I think he has a good chance to be the next great QB in the league, up there with Manning and Brees. Question to the people completely sold on him: Where would you take him in your dynasty rookie draft? In 1998, I'm sure many people took Ryan Leaf, Robert Edwards, Curtis Enis, Fred Taylor and Randy Moss before Manning. Or at least the conventional wisdom said so. Apart from arguably Randy Moss, has anyone been more important to a dynasty team than Manning? Fred Taylor put in a long and good career, but nothing like Manning's. So if you think Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, and you don't think any of the other guys (Bryant, Spiller, etc) are going to be top 3-5 all time at their positions, would you take him first overall? If not, why not? I would. I won't get a chance, but I certainly would.

I have the 1.01 in a rookie draft for a 12 team ppr league. I have Flacco at qb and nothing at WR or RB. For that reason I'm either taking matthews, bryant or spiller depending on situation. If Bradford somehow makes it to 2.01 I'll take him but I highly doubt it. I'd probably take him with 1.05 if I had an older qb.I'm looking to trade back though and if I do I might take him anyway, he could be that good.

 

[Go deep]

I was sold last season, and thought he was better than Stafford, who i liked alot. His accuracy is incredible, thats something you cant learn. My only real concerns this year was the shoulder and arm strength. I dont want to get too caught up in yesterdays proday, but he looked bigger and stronger than i thought, and the shoulder seemed to be 100%. I was also impressed how he performed under the pressure, there were millions of dollars on the line for him yesterday, and he looked cool as they come. Bigger stronger Drew Brees? OK, maybe im getting ahead of myself, but if someone would have called Peyton Manning the next Dan Marino after before he was drafted im sure plenty of people would have laughed at that. I havnt been this excited for a QB since Peyton, the only bad thing is the Bills wont get him.

I think he has a good chance to be the next great QB in the league, up there with Manning and Brees. Question to the people completely sold on him: Where would you take him in your dynasty rookie draft? In 1998, I'm sure many people took Ryan Leaf, Robert Edwards, Curtis Enis, Fred Taylor and Randy Moss before Manning. Or at least the conventional wisdom said so. Apart from arguably Randy Moss, has anyone been more important to a dynasty team than Manning? Fred Taylor put in a long and good career, but nothing like Manning's. So if you think Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, and you don't think any of the other guys (Bryant, Spiller, etc) are going to be top 3-5 all time at their positions, would you take him first overall? If not, why not? I would. I won't get a chance, but I certainly would.

If you think Bradford's going to be as good as Manning, you're nuts. Bradford has a ceiling as high as Manning's and might possibly reach it if everything breaks right, but the odds of Bradford being the next Manning are about 1 in 100.

I agree with this, even though i think Bradford is going to be the next great QB, im certainly not sure of it, i just like his chances more than any otther QB i have seen in a while. Since RB and WR are that much more important in my leagues, im always going to take them before QB's, excluding extreme circumstances. I reached a bit for Matt Ryan a couple years ago, and took him at 8 in one league and 9 in another. Thats likely the highest i would take a QB unless the RB and WR class was so poor that i had no choice. One other thing, i never take need into account, i could have 8 good RB's and no QB's and it wouldnt affect my decision in any way other than a tie-breaker.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I play in mainly start 2 QB leagues were it properly values the importance of each position and the top QB's are always somewhere in the top 5 picks. In fact RB's are the least desireable picks in our rookie draft by a value stand point.

If I had to guess how our first 5 picks would play out this year I am pretty sure it will go like this:

1) D. Bryant

2) Bradford

3) Claussen

4) D. Thomas

5) Value drop to either Spiller or Matthews here

 

[ty247]

I play in mainly start 2 QB leagues were it properly values the importance of each position and the top QB's are always somewhere in the top 5 picks. In fact RB's are the least desireable picks in our rookie draft by a value stand point.If I had to guess how our first 5 picks would play out this year I am pretty sure it will go like this:1) D. Bryant2) Bradford3) Claussen4) D. Thomas5) Value drop to either Spiller or Matthews here

You play in a 2QB league and you think Bryant goes before Bradford?Are you that sold on Bryant or not as high on Bradford.. I'd think the top 3 in the draft would go1. Bradford2. Bryant3 .Clausen

 

[Zoomanji]

If you think Bradford's going to be as good as Manning, you're nuts. Bradford has a ceiling as high as Manning's and might possibly reach it if everything breaks right, but the odds of Bradford being the next Manning are about 1 in 100.

Here you go 0000You forgot a few zeros

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I play in mainly start 2 QB leagues were it properly values the importance of each position and the top QB's are always somewhere in the top 5 picks. In fact RB's are the least desireable picks in our rookie draft by a value stand point.If I had to guess how our first 5 picks would play out this year I am pretty sure it will go like this:1) D. Bryant2) Bradford3) Claussen4) D. Thomas5) Value drop to either Spiller or Matthews here

You play in a 2QB league and you think Bryant goes before Bradford?Are you that sold on Bryant or not as high on Bradford.. I'd think the top 3 in the draft would go1. Bradford2. Bryant3 .Clausen

I essentially think it is a coin flip as to who is the better long term prospect between Bryant/Bradford. But the guy with the number 1 pick has already gone on record as saying he perfers Brayant.

 

[phthalatemagic]

I was sold last season, and thought he was better than Stafford, who i liked alot. His accuracy is incredible, thats something you cant learn. My only real concerns this year was the shoulder and arm strength. I dont want to get too caught up in yesterdays proday, but he looked bigger and stronger than i thought, and the shoulder seemed to be 100%. I was also impressed how he performed under the pressure, there were millions of dollars on the line for him yesterday, and he looked cool as they come. Bigger stronger Drew Brees? OK, maybe im getting ahead of myself, but if someone would have called Peyton Manning the next Dan Marino after before he was drafted im sure plenty of people would have laughed at that. I havnt been this excited for a QB since Peyton, the only bad thing is the Bills wont get him.

I think he has a good chance to be the next great QB in the league, up there with Manning and Brees. Question to the people completely sold on him: Where would you take him in your dynasty rookie draft? In 1998, I'm sure many people took Ryan Leaf, Robert Edwards, Curtis Enis, Fred Taylor and Randy Moss before Manning. Or at least the conventional wisdom said so. Apart from arguably Randy Moss, has anyone been more important to a dynasty team than Manning? Fred Taylor put in a long and good career, but nothing like Manning's. So if you think Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, and you don't think any of the other guys (Bryant, Spiller, etc) are going to be top 3-5 all time at their positions, would you take him first overall? If not, why not? I would. I won't get a chance, but I certainly would.

If you think Bradford's going to be as good as Manning, you're nuts. Bradford has a ceiling as high as Manning's and might possibly reach it if everything breaks right, but the odds of Bradford being the next Manning are about 1 in 100.

I'm not the only one that said it. But I guess I'm just the only one that is not going to back down from these predictions

 

[Abraham]

"not very". I don't like how he performs without a great line in front of him.

 

[Scooby1974]

I was sold last season, and thought he was better than Stafford, who i liked alot. His accuracy is incredible, thats something you cant learn. My only real concerns this year was the shoulder and arm strength. I dont want to get too caught up in yesterdays proday, but he looked bigger and stronger than i thought, and the shoulder seemed to be 100%. I was also impressed how he performed under the pressure, there were millions of dollars on the line for him yesterday, and he looked cool as they come. Bigger stronger Drew Brees? OK, maybe im getting ahead of myself, but if someone would have called Peyton Manning the next Dan Marino after before he was drafted im sure plenty of people would have laughed at that. I havnt been this excited for a QB since Peyton, the only bad thing is the Bills wont get him.

I think he has a good chance to be the next great QB in the league, up there with Manning and Brees. Question to the people completely sold on him: Where would you take him in your dynasty rookie draft? In 1998, I'm sure many people took Ryan Leaf, Robert Edwards, Curtis Enis, Fred Taylor and Randy Moss before Manning. Or at least the conventional wisdom said so. Apart from arguably Randy Moss, has anyone been more important to a dynasty team than Manning? Fred Taylor put in a long and good career, but nothing like Manning's. So if you think Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, and you don't think any of the other guys (Bryant, Spiller, etc) are going to be top 3-5 all time at their positions, would you take him first overall? If not, why not? I would. I won't get a chance, but I certainly would.

If you think Bradford's going to be as good as Manning, you're nuts. Bradford has a ceiling as high as Manning's and might possibly reach it if everything breaks right, but the odds of Bradford being the next Manning are about 1 in 100.

I'm not the only one that said it. But I guess I'm just the only one that is not going to back down from these predictions

IF St. Louis had Marvin Harrison II, Reggie Wayne II, and Dallas Clark II sitting around waiting for a QB we MIGHT be able to take away some of the "0's". What are the odds of that perfect storm blowing through? St. Louis doesn't even have ONE guy that translates to the talent of Harrison/Wayne/Clark let alone all 3. It is WAY too early to put Bradford's name in the same sentence with. Manning.

 

[thriftyrocker]

IF St. Louis had Marvin Harrison II, Reggie Wayne II, and Dallas Clark II sitting around waiting for a QB we MIGHT be able to take away some of the "0's". What are the odds of that perfect storm blowing through? St. Louis doesn't even have ONE guy that translates to the talent of Harrison/Wayne/Clark let alone all 3. It is WAY too early to put Bradford's name in the same sentence with. Manning.

Steven Jackson

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

I wouldn't put him ahead of Stafford; I would put him ahead of Sanchez, Flacco and Ryan. I think with Bradford it's almost all roses, but you have to remember how little we've seen of him. In college, he was arguably worse than Colt McCoy, who is an unimpressive prospect. OU has never produced an NFL QB, and while that doesn't mean much, it's worth remembering that lots of QBs have looked good there. He played in the B12 with a bunch of terrible defenses, and he had an enormous talent advantage. People knock Tebow for beating up inferior competition, and while I think the SEC is overrated, there's no doubt that SEC defenses are a lot tougher than B12 defenses. Look at OU's offensive talent in '08:T Phil Loadholt (2nd)G Duke Robinson (5th)C Jon Cooper (UDFA- MIN)G Brandon Walker (UDFA- HOU)T Trent Williams (2010 1st)TE Jermaine Gresham (2010 1st)RB DeMarco Murray (2011 pick -- if not for injuries he'd be a first round guy)RB Chris Brown (2010 late round pick)WR Juaquin Inglesias (3rd) WR Manuel Johnson (7th)WR Quentin Chaney (UDFA - STL)WR Ryan Broyley (2011 pick - could be a 2nd round guy)Bradford was protected by a full line of NFL players, including two stud tackles. He was throwing to four explosive WRs and had two of the best RBs in college football. And he was playing under a great coach against outmanned competition. Against Florida, Bradford didn't implode, but he looked mortal. The other way this argument goes is that even if you put 2008 Drew Brees on the 2008 Sooners, I'm not sure they're much better. How many points per game are they going to score? 60? 70? Well, OU topped 60 in five straight games in 2008 and topped 50 in four other games. So even with incredible talent, Bradford was doing incredible things. But I think a guy like Cutler might have been a "safer" pick in that you could see he was elite; he wasn't the product of anything but himself, as he was on a bad team playing against solid defenses. I like Bradford, but I can't say that I've got no reservations about him. The thing is, if you're the Rams, how many times are you going to be able to get a guy with his ability at his age? Unless you plan on being at the very top of the draft consistently, the answer is not very often.

This is exactly my feeling with Bradford. How much of it is him and how much of it is his situation?Also add in that he was a 3*** guy coming into a great situation. I know that doesn't mean everything....but it means something IMO.

 

[MDSkinner]

IF St. Louis had Marvin Harrison II, Reggie Wayne II, and Dallas Clark II sitting around waiting for a QB we MIGHT be able to take away some of the "0's". What are the odds of that perfect storm blowing through? St. Louis doesn't even have ONE guy that translates to the talent of Harrison/Wayne/Clark let alone all 3. It is WAY too early to put Bradford's name in the same sentence with. Manning.

One could argue that Manning is a massive part of the reason that all three of these guys ended up being as good as they were/are at the professional level. And if that is true then someone who thinks that Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, would not worry about the current surrounding cast, since Bradford will invariably make whatever surrounding cast he has even better.I am not personally convinced of that. But anyone who is does not need to be as concerned about surrounding cast I would say, especially when he is likely to have Steven Jackson (as noted above) as his RB.

 

[jurb26]

I like Bradford as a prospect but feel his is and has been overrated for a while now. No doubt he is a 1st rounder, but he is in no way a better prospect than a guy like Stafford and I actually like Claussen better than him from this class as well.

 

[jurb26]

I wouldn't put him ahead of Stafford; I would put him ahead of Sanchez, Flacco and Ryan. I think with Bradford it's almost all roses, but you have to remember how little we've seen of him. In college, he was arguably worse than Colt McCoy, who is an unimpressive prospect. OU has never produced an NFL QB, and while that doesn't mean much, it's worth remembering that lots of QBs have looked good there. He played in the B12 with a bunch of terrible defenses, and he had an enormous talent advantage. People knock Tebow for beating up inferior competition, and while I think the SEC is overrated, there's no doubt that SEC defenses are a lot tougher than B12 defenses. Look at OU's offensive talent in '08:T Phil Loadholt (2nd)G Duke Robinson (5th)C Jon Cooper (UDFA- MIN)G Brandon Walker (UDFA- HOU)T Trent Williams (2010 1st)TE Jermaine Gresham (2010 1st)RB DeMarco Murray (2011 pick -- if not for injuries he'd be a first round guy)RB Chris Brown (2010 late round pick)WR Juaquin Inglesias (3rd) WR Manuel Johnson (7th)WR Quentin Chaney (UDFA - STL)WR Ryan Broyley (2011 pick - could be a 2nd round guy)Bradford was protected by a full line of NFL players, including two stud tackles. He was throwing to four explosive WRs and had two of the best RBs in college football. And he was playing under a great coach against outmanned competition. Against Florida, Bradford didn't implode, but he looked mortal. The other way this argument goes is that even if you put 2008 Drew Brees on the 2008 Sooners, I'm not sure they're much better. How many points per game are they going to score? 60? 70? Well, OU topped 60 in five straight games in 2008 and topped 50 in four other games. So even with incredible talent, Bradford was doing incredible things. But I think a guy like Cutler might have been a "safer" pick in that you could see he was elite; he wasn't the product of anything but himself, as he was on a bad team playing against solid defenses. I like Bradford, but I can't say that I've got no reservations about him. The thing is, if you're the Rams, how many times are you going to be able to get a guy with his ability at his age? Unless you plan on being at the very top of the draft consistently, the answer is not very often.

These are all great points and I made some of the same arguments that you are in this post last year when people debated Stafford/Bradford. The supporting cast on Oklahoma was severely underrated back then but maybe the perception has changed since then. The most overwhelming aspect of that 2008 Oklahoma team was how dominant their oline was. Is was comical to watch at times. I'm sure some of that had to do with the unit itself and their ability and some of it was the level of competition from B12 Ds that year. As you said, UF made them look mortal. Then again that was a pretty exceptional group too.

 

[Scooby1974]

IF St. Louis had Marvin Harrison II, Reggie Wayne II, and Dallas Clark II sitting around waiting for a QB we MIGHT be able to take away some of the "0's". What are the odds of that perfect storm blowing through? St. Louis doesn't even have ONE guy that translates to the talent of Harrison/Wayne/Clark let alone all 3. It is WAY too early to put Bradford's name in the same sentence with. Manning.

One could argue that Manning is a massive part of the reason that all three of these guys ended up being as good as they were/are at the professional level. And if that is true then someone who thinks that Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, would not worry about the current surrounding cast, since Bradford will invariably make whatever surrounding cast he has even better.I am not personally convinced of that. But anyone who is does not need to be as concerned about surrounding cast I would say, especially when he is likely to have Steven Jackson (as noted above) as his RB.

Good points that I too have considered, and I agree that Manning certainly makes everyone look better than they are...BUT...you can't convince me Harrison and Wayne were/are simply average or slightly above average "Joes". Manning hasn't exactly needed a huge ground game to find his passing success with either (Edge was good, Addai is obviously average to above average, and Donald Brown is probably above average). We haven't even mentioned the talent and synergy Indy has on their line or in their offensive scheme (how many years have they been perfecting this offense?) either. Outside of Steven Jackson (who certainly has GREAT talent at RUNNING BACK that will not catch 100+ balls downfield so as to open up the running game), St. Louis has very little as far as skill position players. Will Avery or Laurent Robinson turn into a Harrison/Wayne? Have they shown any glimpses? Will the St. Louis line start blocking all of a sudden? Steven Jackson is very good, but there are still WAY too many people and things that need to fall into place for Bradford to be in the same sentence as. Manning.

 

[ty247]

IF St. Louis had Marvin Harrison II, Reggie Wayne II, and Dallas Clark II sitting around waiting for a QB we MIGHT be able to take away some of the "0's". What are the odds of that perfect storm blowing through? St. Louis doesn't even have ONE guy that translates to the talent of Harrison/Wayne/Clark let alone all 3. It is WAY too early to put Bradford's name in the same sentence with. Manning.

One could argue that Manning is a massive part of the reason that all three of these guys ended up being as good as they were/are at the professional level. And if that is true then someone who thinks that Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, would not worry about the current surrounding cast, since Bradford will invariably make whatever surrounding cast he has even better.I am not personally convinced of that. But anyone who is does not need to be as concerned about surrounding cast I would say, especially when he is likely to have Steven Jackson (as noted above) as his RB.

Good points that I too have considered, and I agree that Manning certainly makes everyone look better than they are...BUT...you can't convince me Harrison and Wayne were/are simply average or slightly above average "Joes". Manning hasn't exactly needed a huge ground game to find his passing success with either (Edge was good, Addai is obviously average to above average, and Donald Brown is probably above average). We haven't even mentioned the talent and synergy Indy has on their line or in their offensive scheme (how many years have they been perfecting this offense?) either. Outside of Steven Jackson (who certainly has GREAT talent at RUNNING BACK that will not catch 100+ balls downfield so as to open up the running game), St. Louis has very little as far as skill position players. Will Avery or Laurent Robinson turn into a Harrison/Wayne? Have they shown any glimpses? Will the St. Louis line start blocking all of a sudden? Steven Jackson is very good, but there are still WAY too many people and things that need to fall into place for Bradford to be in the same sentence as. Manning.

Bradford would have some decent pieces on the offensive line, Steven Jackson, Avery, Gibson and Robinson aren't bad offensive pieces.. It's not terrible.

 

[Go deep]

IF St. Louis had Marvin Harrison II, Reggie Wayne II, and Dallas Clark II sitting around waiting for a QB we MIGHT be able to take away some of the "0's". What are the odds of that perfect storm blowing through? St. Louis doesn't even have ONE guy that translates to the talent of Harrison/Wayne/Clark let alone all 3. It is WAY too early to put Bradford's name in the same sentence with. Manning.

One could argue that Manning is a massive part of the reason that all three of these guys ended up being as good as they were/are at the professional level. And if that is true then someone who thinks that Bradford is going to be as good as Manning, would not worry about the current surrounding cast, since Bradford will invariably make whatever surrounding cast he has even better.I am not personally convinced of that. But anyone who is does not need to be as concerned about surrounding cast I would say, especially when he is likely to have Steven Jackson (as noted above) as his RB.

Good points that I too have considered, and I agree that Manning certainly makes everyone look better than they are...BUT...you can't convince me Harrison and Wayne were/are simply average or slightly above average "Joes". Manning hasn't exactly needed a huge ground game to find his passing success with either (Edge was good, Addai is obviously average to above average, and Donald Brown is probably above average). We haven't even mentioned the talent and synergy Indy has on their line or in their offensive scheme (how many years have they been perfecting this offense?) either. Outside of Steven Jackson (who certainly has GREAT talent at RUNNING BACK that will not catch 100+ balls downfield so as to open up the running game), St. Louis has very little as far as skill position players. Will Avery or Laurent Robinson turn into a Harrison/Wayne? Have they shown any glimpses? Will the St. Louis line start blocking all of a sudden? Steven Jackson is very good, but there are still WAY too many people and things that need to fall into place for Bradford to be in the same sentence as. Manning.

What did Mannning have when he got to Indy?

 

[MDSkinner]

Good points that I too have considered, and I agree that Manning certainly makes everyone look better than they are...BUT...you can't convince me Harrison and Wayne were/are simply average or slightly above average "Joes". Manning hasn't exactly needed a huge ground game to find his passing success with either (Edge was good, Addai is obviously average to above average, and Donald Brown is probably above average). We haven't even mentioned the talent and synergy Indy has on their line or in their offensive scheme (how many years have they been perfecting this offense?) either. Outside of Steven Jackson (who certainly has GREAT talent at RUNNING BACK that will not catch 100+ balls downfield so as to open up the running game), St. Louis has very little as far as skill position players. Will Avery or Laurent Robinson turn into a Harrison/Wayne? Have they shown any glimpses? Will the St. Louis line start blocking all of a sudden?

Steven Jackson is very good, but there are still WAY too many people and things that need to fall into place for Bradford to be in the same sentence as. Manning.

I am not remotely trying to say that Harrison or Wayne are average or slightly above, but when Manning was drafted the surrounding team was not all that different from the modern day Rams. At RB, the Colts back then had Marshall Faulk, and he was the stud on the offense in Mannings rookie year as he had over 2,200 yards from scrimmage and lead the team in rushing yards, receptions (86) and receiving yards (908) . The leading receiver on the team that year was in fact Marvin Harrison who had 59/776/7 but he was not close to what he became and you could certainly argue that with the numbers that before getting hurt last year Laurent Robinson at least showed some promise (in the two games prior to his injury he put up 11/141/1 which works out to a solid 88/1128/8 season if he could have continued at that pace....obviously a big if but certainly comparable to what Marvin put up in that first year with Manning). So Peyton coming in was not loaded for bear week one of his rookie season, but throughout those years as they added players, those players just kept being really good. Obviously the front office has a lot to do with that but I have to assume PM does as well.

So Marshall Faulk at that point of his career seems relatively comparable to Steven Jackson now. And Marvin Harrison at that point of his career seems relatively comparable to Robinson/Avery. Looking back at Marvin and his amazing career obviously it ends up not being close right now, but if Bradford is close to Manning we may be saying the same things about one of those two guys.

Stats for 98 Colts

Again, I do not see Bradford being Manning but if anyone does, the place he is likely to land is not that far removed from the place Peyton landed when he was drafted, at least not IMO.

 

[Sinrman]

As a Lions fan, I really wished he had gone pro a year earlier, as he would have easily been the #1 pick overall, and not Stafford. Bradford would be a Lion and we would be moving forward even more so than now. Not saying it wouldn't have happened in the NFL, but the shoulder injuries wouldn't even be a concern as we would have never seen them.

I almost believe Bradford didn't go pro just to avoid the Lions...

 

[bulger2holt]

Give the Rams some time to draft or sign some offensive weapons. You guys act like Bradford is stuck with the current guys forever. One piece at a time. Plus, Sjax, Avery, Robinson, Gibson and Danny A. are plenty capabe. Brady didn't have all pro type players until Moss came.

 

[Christo]

I wouldn't put him ahead of Stafford; I would put him ahead of Sanchez, Flacco and Ryan. I think with Bradford it's almost all roses, but you have to remember how little we've seen of him. In college, he was arguably worse than Colt McCoy, who is an unimpressive prospect. OU has never produced an NFL QB, and while that doesn't mean much, it's worth remembering that lots of QBs have looked good there. He played in the B12 with a bunch of terrible defenses, and he had an enormous talent advantage. People knock Tebow for beating up inferior competition, and while I think the SEC is overrated, there's no doubt that SEC defenses are a lot tougher than B12 defenses. Look at OU's offensive talent in '08:T Phil Loadholt (2nd)G Duke Robinson (5th)C Jon Cooper (UDFA- MIN)G Brandon Walker (UDFA- HOU)T Trent Williams (2010 1st)TE Jermaine Gresham (2010 1st)RB DeMarco Murray (2011 pick -- if not for injuries he'd be a first round guy)RB Chris Brown (2010 late round pick)WR Juaquin Inglesias (3rd) WR Manuel Johnson (7th)WR Quentin Chaney (UDFA - STL)WR Ryan Broyley (2011 pick - could be a 2nd round guy)Bradford was protected by a full line of NFL players, including two stud tackles. He was throwing to four explosive WRs and had two of the best RBs in college football. And he was playing under a great coach against outmanned competition. Against Florida, Bradford didn't implode, but he looked mortal. The other way this argument goes is that even if you put 2008 Drew Brees on the 2008 Sooners, I'm not sure they're much better. How many points per game are they going to score? 60? 70? Well, OU topped 60 in five straight games in 2008 and topped 50 in four other games. So even with incredible talent, Bradford was doing incredible things. But I think a guy like Cutler might have been a "safer" pick in that you could see he was elite; he wasn't the product of anything but himself, as he was on a bad team playing against solid defenses. I like Bradford, but I can't say that I've got no reservations about him. The thing is, if you're the Rams, how many times are you going to be able to get a guy with his ability at his age? Unless you plan on being at the very top of the draft consistently, the answer is not very often.

Bradford did have a great OL and TE. But his accuracy made Iglesias, Johnson & Chaney look a lot better than they are.

 

[Honda]

Very

 

[Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub]

Sold in the same way as Manning.

Rams will be an ideal fantasy situation for him. [i think they've got a couple unheralded WR in Robinson & Gibson to grow with. Avery's got some potential too -- I just think he's got to become a better football player/WR. Would love to see Robinson put in a healthy season. He showed some of the best hands I saw in preseason action last year]

 

[cobalt_27]

Sold in the same way as Manning.

Rams will be an ideal fantasy situation for him. [i think they've got a couple unheralded WR in Robinson & Gibson to grow with. Avery's got some potential too -- I just think he's got to become a better football player/WR. Would love to see Robinson put in a healthy season. He showed some of the best hands I saw in preseason action last year]

Eli Manning, I hope.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

As a Lions fan, I really wished he had gone pro a year earlier, as he would have easily been the #1 pick overall, and not Stafford. Bradford would be a Lion and we would be moving forward even more so than now. Not saying it wouldn't have happened in the NFL, but the shoulder injuries wouldn't even be a concern as we would have never seen them.I almost believe Bradford didn't go pro just to avoid the Lions...

You don't like Stafford for the Lions, I like him a lot. His turnovers were high but that's what happens to rookies in the NFL and that's what happens to rookie's who play on teams that won ZERO games the year before.I was impressed with Stafford and glad he's a Lion.

 

[Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub]

Sold in the same way as Manning.

Rams will be an ideal fantasy situation for him. [i think they've got a couple unheralded WR in Robinson & Gibson to grow with. Avery's got some potential too -- I just think he's got to become a better football player/WR. Would love to see Robinson put in a healthy season. He showed some of the best hands I saw in preseason action last year]

Eli Manning, I hope.

Consider me in the Peyton Manning group if he lands in STL and is playing 9+ games/year in a dome. I think he's the no brainer pick for a franchise that needs a face........and more people in the seats. I think he's got the potential to be a superstar. Given the only concerns I had [like everyone else, the shoulder], the reports of his workout were glowing.

======================

He's got better accuracy than Eli. [i don't think we've seen the best from Eli yet either. I just like Bradford more than I liked Eli]

 

[az_prof]

I wouldn't put him ahead of Stafford; I would put him ahead of Sanchez, Flacco and Ryan. I think with Bradford it's almost all roses, but you have to remember how little we've seen of him. In college, he was arguably worse than Colt McCoy, who is an unimpressive prospect. OU has never produced an NFL QB, and while that doesn't mean much, it's worth remembering that lots of QBs have looked good there. He played in the B12 with a bunch of terrible defenses, and he had an enormous talent advantage. People knock Tebow for beating up inferior competition, and while I think the SEC is overrated, there's no doubt that SEC defenses are a lot tougher than B12 defenses. Look at OU's offensive talent in '08:T Phil Loadholt (2nd)G Duke Robinson (5th)C Jon Cooper (UDFA- MIN)G Brandon Walker (UDFA- HOU)T Trent Williams (2010 1st)TE Jermaine Gresham (2010 1st)RB DeMarco Murray (2011 pick -- if not for injuries he'd be a first round guy)RB Chris Brown (2010 late round pick)WR Juaquin Inglesias (3rd) WR Manuel Johnson (7th)WR Quentin Chaney (UDFA - STL)WR Ryan Broyley (2011 pick - could be a 2nd round guy)Bradford was protected by a full line of NFL players, including two stud tackles. He was throwing to four explosive WRs and had two of the best RBs in college football. And he was playing under a great coach against outmanned competition. Against Florida, Bradford didn't implode, but he looked mortal. The other way this argument goes is that even if you put 2008 Drew Brees on the 2008 Sooners, I'm not sure they're much better. How many points per game are they going to score? 60? 70? Well, OU topped 60 in five straight games in 2008 and topped 50 in four other games. So even with incredible talent, Bradford was doing incredible things. But I think a guy like Cutler might have been a "safer" pick in that you could see he was elite; he wasn't the product of anything but himself, as he was on a bad team playing against solid defenses. I like Bradford, but I can't say that I've got no reservations about him. The thing is, if you're the Rams, how many times are you going to be able to get a guy with his ability at his age? Unless you plan on being at the very top of the draft consistently, the answer is not very often.

This is exactly my feeling with Bradford. How much of it is him and how much of it is his situation?Also add in that he was a 3*** guy coming into a great situation. I know that doesn't mean everything....but it means something IMO.

How do you know it isn't HIM making the other guys around him better? Same for Manning. In my experience, great QBs make the other offensive players, especially skill players, appear better. Look at Favre in MN: suddenly Sidney Rice is a top 10 WR. I have no opinion on Bradford, but I am questioning the logic that says because he is around players perceived to be good that he might not be as good as he appears. This is circular reasoning because it could just as easily be that they are not as good and he makes them appear better. After all, that long list of names someone posted above doesn't have too many NFL superstars. Juaquin Inglesias???? I don't even know any of those other players other than Loadholt who looks to be a good offensive lineman, but I am not penciling him into Canton just yet.

 

[Sinrman]

As a Lions fan, I really wished he had gone pro a year earlier, as he would have easily been the #1 pick overall, and not Stafford. Bradford would be a Lion and we would be moving forward even more so than now. Not saying it wouldn't have happened in the NFL, but the shoulder injuries wouldn't even be a concern as we would have never seen them.I almost believe Bradford didn't go pro just to avoid the Lions...

You don't like Stafford for the Lions, I like him a lot. His turnovers were high but that's what happens to rookies in the NFL and that's what happens to rookie's who play on teams that won ZERO games the year before.I was impressed with Stafford and glad he's a Lion.

Well, I must say that I was initially NOT happy with Detroit drafting Stafford. However, I was impressed with his ability to take vicious hits and get back up. That game against Cleveland helped seal the deal for me. That was some serious guts, and showed me he's a winner. Now maybe after 3 or 4 years of getting killed he might not be so eager to do that sort of thing, but right now I like him.I'd still rather have Bradford, but Stafford has potential...

 

[ChargersOH]

Bradford did have a great OL and TE. But his accuracy made Iglesias, Johnson & Chaney look a lot better than they are.

Making them look better at the college level against Tulsa and Baylor is one thing. The NFL another.Accuracy is easy when pressure is scarce. I think Bradford is an amazing prospect, but comparing a guy playing in a weak college conference with arguably the best NFL QB ever before he's even taken one snap is a bit premature in my opinion. He'll have a rough year next year. What matters is what he does when he learns the speed of the NFL, and how he adjusts to the NFL schemes.I wouldn't expect much from him next year. If he's lucky, Spags will start a vet and let him learn for the first half of the year.

 

[Christo]

Bradford did have a great OL and TE. But his accuracy made Iglesias, Johnson & Chaney look a lot better than they are.

Making them look better at the college level against Tulsa and Baylor is one thing. The NFL another.

I guaranty you he won't be throwing to them in the NFL

Accuracy is easy when pressure is scarce. I think Bradford is an amazing prospect, but comparing a guy playing in a weak college conference with arguably the best NFL QB ever before he's even taken one snap is a bit premature in my opinion.

I never did make the comparison. Oh, weak college conference my ###.

He'll have a rough year next year. What matters is what he does when he learns the speed of the NFL, and how he adjusts to the NFL schemes.I wouldn't expect much from him next year. If he's lucky, Spags will start a vet and let him learn for the first half of the year.

Never said I expected much from him next year.Seriously, did you mean to respond to my post?

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

I wouldn't put him ahead of Stafford; I would put him ahead of Sanchez, Flacco and Ryan. I think with Bradford it's almost all roses, but you have to remember how little we've seen of him. In college, he was arguably worse than Colt McCoy, who is an unimpressive prospect. OU has never produced an NFL QB, and while that doesn't mean much, it's worth remembering that lots of QBs have looked good there. He played in the B12 with a bunch of terrible defenses, and he had an enormous talent advantage. People knock Tebow for beating up inferior competition, and while I think the SEC is overrated, there's no doubt that SEC defenses are a lot tougher than B12 defenses. Look at OU's offensive talent in '08:T Phil Loadholt (2nd)G Duke Robinson (5th)C Jon Cooper (UDFA- MIN)G Brandon Walker (UDFA- HOU)T Trent Williams (2010 1st)TE Jermaine Gresham (2010 1st)RB DeMarco Murray (2011 pick -- if not for injuries he'd be a first round guy)RB Chris Brown (2010 late round pick)WR Juaquin Inglesias (3rd) WR Manuel Johnson (7th)WR Quentin Chaney (UDFA - STL)WR Ryan Broyley (2011 pick - could be a 2nd round guy)Bradford was protected by a full line of NFL players, including two stud tackles. He was throwing to four explosive WRs and had two of the best RBs in college football. And he was playing under a great coach against outmanned competition. Against Florida, Bradford didn't implode, but he looked mortal. The other way this argument goes is that even if you put 2008 Drew Brees on the 2008 Sooners, I'm not sure they're much better. How many points per game are they going to score? 60? 70? Well, OU topped 60 in five straight games in 2008 and topped 50 in four other games. So even with incredible talent, Bradford was doing incredible things. But I think a guy like Cutler might have been a "safer" pick in that you could see he was elite; he wasn't the product of anything but himself, as he was on a bad team playing against solid defenses. I like Bradford, but I can't say that I've got no reservations about him. The thing is, if you're the Rams, how many times are you going to be able to get a guy with his ability at his age? Unless you plan on being at the very top of the draft consistently, the answer is not very often.

This is exactly my feeling with Bradford. How much of it is him and how much of it is his situation?Also add in that he was a 3*** guy coming into a great situation. I know that doesn't mean everything....but it means something IMO.

How do you know it isn't HIM making the other guys around him better? Same for Manning. In my experience, great QBs make the other offensive players, especially skill players, appear better. Look at Favre in MN: suddenly Sidney Rice is a top 10 WR. I have no opinion on Bradford, but I am questioning the logic that says because he is around players perceived to be good that he might not be as good as he appears. This is circular reasoning because it could just as easily be that they are not as good and he makes them appear better. After all, that long list of names someone posted above doesn't have too many NFL superstars. Juaquin Inglesias???? I don't even know any of those other players other than Loadholt who looks to be a good offensive lineman, but I am not penciling him into Canton just yet.

Josh Heupel and Jason White told me.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I have no opinion on Bradford, but I am questioning the logic that says because he is around players perceived to be good that he might not be as good as he appears. This is circular reasoning because it could just as easily be that they are not as good and he makes them appear better. After all, that long list of names someone posted above doesn't have too many NFL superstars. Juaquin Inglesias???? I don't even know any of those other players other than Loadholt who looks to be a good offensive lineman, but I am not penciling him into Canton just yet.

Against a 5'9, 4.8 cornerback who is going to be a salesman for the rest of his life, Juaquin Inglesias looks like Jerry Rice. And against a 280 pound DE with no quick acceleration who is going to be a banker when he graduates, those OL look like they're all bound for Canton. If you've got over 13 people on your offense alone that will be in the NFL within a couple of years, you've got a pretty ridiculous advantage over your competition. It doesn't matter how good those guys will be in the pros (although you've got elite talents in Loadholt, Williams, Gresham, Broyley and Murray); just making the pros separates them from 98% of college players.

 

[Christo]

I have no opinion on Bradford, but I am questioning the logic that says because he is around players perceived to be good that he might not be as good as he appears. This is circular reasoning because it could just as easily be that they are not as good and he makes them appear better. After all, that long list of names someone posted above doesn't have too many NFL superstars. Juaquin Inglesias???? I don't even know any of those other players other than Loadholt who looks to be a good offensive lineman, but I am not penciling him into Canton just yet.

Against a 5'9, 4.8 cornerback who is going to be a salesman for the rest of his life, Juaquin Inglesias looks like Jerry Rice. And against a 280 pound DE with no quick acceleration who is going to be a banker when he graduates, those OL look like they're all bound for Canton. If you've got over 13 people on your offense alone that will be in the NFL within a couple of years, you've got a pretty ridiculous advantage over your competition. It doesn't matter how good those guys will be in the pros (although you've got elite talents in Loadholt, Williams, Gresham, Broyley and Murray); just making the pros separates them from 98% of college players.

It's Broyles.

 

[Routilla]

"not very". I don't like how he performs without a great line in front of him.

This. He will be a high dollar rag doll.

 

[Hendo]

As a Lions fan, I really wished he had gone pro a year earlier, as he would have easily been the #1 pick overall, and not Stafford. Bradford would be a Lion and we would be moving forward even more so than now. Not saying it wouldn't have happened in the NFL, but the shoulder injuries wouldn't even be a concern as we would have never seen them.I almost believe Bradford didn't go pro just to avoid the Lions...

your in the minority there as a lot of people think Stafford has the goods. Many pundits and scouts alike all had Stafford graded higher then Bradford and i'm pretty sure if you ran a poll now Stafford would lead it. I like Bradford but he never ran a pro-style offense at all and that to me is a knock on him as well as the shoulder injury. He has always been accurate but he does lack good arm strength. He wouldn't be a bad pick for the Rams just one that has questions to answer still imo.