NFL 2016 Draft: To 6 More Rounds Of Misery And Joy!

[Quijote Light]

If Bradford wants to add petulant whiner to his reputation as a highly overpaid, mid to low level talent then he's succeeding. Otherwise he should shut up and play his best football this season in hopes that the Eagles find an interested trading partner or that someone wants to sign him once he's cut. 

[Mexal]

9 minutes ago, sperry said:

The thing is it's NOT a competition.  There is zero doubt that Bradford will be better than Wentz for at least this season.  The problem is, the Eagles aren't going to be good, and they will bench Bradford for Wentz halfway through the year. Not based on Wentz giving them a better chance to win now, because he won't.  Because they traded a ton of draft capital and starters for the guy and they have to get him out there for the experience. Quarterbacks do not sit out years at a time anymore.

The Brees comparison is also not a good one.  First of all, Drew Brees is a first ballot hall of famer, and easily a top 10 QB of all time.  Bradford isn't, so making that comparison is not exactly meaningful.  Secondly, San Diego was a really good offensively. They got the #1 pick the year before because Brees was hurt basically all year and was ineffective or out.  When he returned in 2004, he had a good offensive line, and prime years Antonio Gates and LT to work with.  The Eagles are terrible, and have bottom of the barrel offensive weapons.

The two year contract was meant to be an audition for the long term starting job.  They paid him $18 million per year.  This was just base incompetence, as you don't pay that kind of money to what you view as a placeholder qb.

1. If Bradford plays well, they won't be terrible and they won't find the reason to play Wentz midway through the season. It may happen, it may not but you're already saying that Bradford is the fall guy for a terrible team without actually blaming Bradford for being any part of the reason that the team is terrible in the first place. We've seen teams overcome talent deficiencies elsewhere with good QB play. Clearly Bradford isn't that guy (which is more or less what you're saying) and if that's the case, the Eagles made the smart move to try to get that guy.

2. Brees is a first ballot hall of famer now. At the time the Chargers traded for Rivers, Brees was a 3rd year 2nd round pick who looked fairly terrible in his first two years. He may have been hurt in 2002, but he also had 11 TDs to 15 Ints, 57% completion and 4 fumbles with a 6 ypa. No matter him being injured for 5 games, he was absolutely horrendous and they felt the need to replace him. That is, until he broke out in his 3rd year, got franchised and played again his 4th year. Even after the franchise tag and his shoulder injury, SD offered him a contract which he turned down and got paid by NO. This was when they had Rivers. So using Brees future success as a barometer for saying this is different is ridiculous. He made him into a first ballot because he thrived in the competition, not because he demanded a trade.

3. Then audition. It's not just an audition for the Eagles but an audition for other teams in need of a starting QB. He's being a pussy and I certainly wouldn't want someone on my team who's not willing to compete.

[Maithanet]

If the Eagles don't have enough talent on offense for Bradford to succeed, then he shouldn't have resigned there.  When he signed, they were already out their 2nd round pick, which they traded for Bradford himself.  In the Wentz deal they traded away their 1st and 3rd round picks, and Bradford had no guarantee they would have invested those picks on offense (they have holes on D as well).  It seems ridiculous that Bradford is such a wilting violet that the loss of these two picks drops him into a hopeless situation. 

[Jaime L]

7 minutes ago, sperry said:

 

The thing is it's NOT a competition.  There is zero doubt that Bradford will be better than Wentz for at least this season.  The problem is, the Eagles aren't going to be good, and they will bench Bradford for Wentz halfway through the year. Not based on Wentz giving them a better chance to win now, because he won't.  Because they traded a ton of draft capital and starters for the guy and they have to get him out there for the experience. Quarterbacks do not sit out years at a time anymore.

 

The Brees comparison is also not a good one.  First of all, Drew Brees is a first ballot hall of famer, and easily a top 10 QB of all time.  Bradford isn't, so making that comparison is not exactly meaningful.  Secondly, San Diego was a really good offensively. They got the #1 pick the year before because Brees was hurt basically all year and was ineffective or out.  When he returned in 2004, he had a good offensive line, and prime years Antonio Gates and LT to work with.  The Eagles are terrible, and have bottom of the barrel offensive weapons.

 

The two year contract was meant to be an audition for the long term starting job.  They paid him $18 million per year.  This was just base incompetence, as you don't pay that kind of money to what you view as a placeholder qb.

The Brees competition is meaningful because of how Brees handled San Diego drafting a rookie who was the clear QB of the future. He sucked it up and played well enough to convince a second team to take a chance on him despite a catastrophic shoulder injury.

Kurt Warner on the Giants that same year is another example. Hell the Giants traded up for Eli that year. 

The point is QBs way more accomplished than Sam Bradford has sucked it up and proven themselves in the long run even as the rookie in each case ultimately took over that job longterm. 

I'm sympathetic to Bradford's bad luck in general but not here. 

[sperry]

12 minutes ago, Mexal said:

1. If Bradford plays well, they won't be terrible and they won't find the reason to play Wentz midway through the season. It may happen, it may not but you're already saying that Bradford is the fall guy for a terrible team without actually blaming Bradford for being any part of the reason that the team is terrible in the first place. We've seen teams overcome talent deficiencies elsewhere with good QB play. Clearly Bradford isn't that guy (which is more or less what you're saying) and if that's the case, the Eagles made the smart move to try to get that guy.

2. Brees is a first ballot hall of famer now. At the time the Chargers traded for Rivers, Brees was a 3rd year 2nd round pick who looked fairly terrible in his first two years. He may have been hurt in 2002, but he also had 11 TDs to 15 Ints, 57% completion and 4 fumbles with a 6 ypa. No matter him being injured for 5 games, he was absolutely horrendous and they felt the need to replace him. That is, until he broke out in his 3rd year, got franchised and played again his 4th year. Even after the franchise tag and his shoulder injury, SD offered him a contract which he turned down and got paid by NO. This was when they had Rivers. So using Brees future success as a barometer for saying this is different is ridiculous. He made him into a first ballot because he thrived in the competition, not because he demanded a trade.

3. Then audition. It's not just an audition for the Eagles but an audition for other teams in need of a starting QB. He's being a pussy and I certainly wouldn't want someone on my team who's not willing to compete.

 

 

1. They are going to be terrible no matter what.  They were 7-9 last year, and did not upgrade their roster because they traded starters and draft capital for a player who will not even be on the field.  They are going to be a bad team next year.

 

2.  Brees was playing with prime years Hall of Famers on offense and was able to put together good seasons. If that team had been terrible, like the Eagles are, things very easily could have turned out poorly for him. It also helped him dramatically that Rivers held out in training camp and thus wasn't even close to ready to playing by the time the season started. Brees also didn't have the option to leave in free agency during the offseason. Bradford did, but resigned with the Eagles because they indicated he would have the chance to become their long term starter. They then cut the legs out from under him.

 

 

3. This is not an audition. It has nothign to do with competing.  Say what you will about Bradford, but if you want to win this year, he is starting 16 games over Carson Wentz.  The problem is the Eagles are not trying to win now. They are trying to build for the future around Carson Wentz. As soon as the coaches feel he is ready to play, he is going to play. That has nothing to do with how Sam Bradford plays. He's not competing against anything. He is a placeholder, there is not a competition.  The team is going to be bad, because the Eagles knowingly did not address their needs in the offseason. They went into rebuilding mode.

 

 

 

11 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

The Brees competition is meaningful because of how Brees handled San Diego drafting a rookie who was the clear QB of the future. He sucked it up and played well enough to convince a second team to take a chance on him despite a catastrophic shoulder injury.

Kurt Warner on the Giants that same year is another example. Hell the Giants traded up for Eli that year. 

The point is QBs way more accomplished than Sam Bradford has sucked it up and proven themselves in the long run even as the rookie in each case ultimately took over that job longterm. 

I'm sympathetic to Bradford's bad luck in general but not here. 

 

I'm glad you brought up Kurt Warner.  Because Kurt Warner was benched halfway through the season for Eli Manning despite having a winning record.  Eli proceeded to go 1-6 that season completing 48% of his passes.  So, despite the fact that Kurt Warner was clearly the better QB at the time, he was still benched. Because that's what is going to happen when you have the #1 overall QB behind you. That is exactly why Sam Bradford wants out of this situation.

[Mexal]

3 minutes ago, sperry said:

1. They are going to be terrible no matter what.  They were 7-9 last year, and did not upgrade their roster because they traded starters and draft capital for a player who will not even be on the field.  They are going to be a bad team next year.

2.  Brees was playing with prime years Hall of Famers on offense and was able to put together good seasons. If that team had been terrible, like the Eagles are, things very easily could have turned out poorly for him. It also helped him dramatically that Rivers held out in training camp and thus wasn't even close to ready to playing by the time the season started. Brees also didn't have the option to leave in free agency during the offseason. Bradford did, but resigned with the Eagles because they indicated he would have the chance to become their long term starter. They then cut the legs out from under him.

3. This is not an audition. It has nothign to do with competing.  Say what you will about Bradford, but if you want to win this year, he is starting 16 games over Carson Wentz.  The problem is the Eagles are not trying to win now. They are trying to build for the future around Carson Wentz. As soon as the coaches feel he is ready to play, he is going to play. That has nothing to do with how Sam Bradford plays. He's not competing against anything. He is a placeholder, there is not a competition.  The team is going to be bad, because the Eagles knowingly did not address their needs in the offseason. They went into rebuilding mode.

I'm glad you brought up Kurt Warner.  Because Kurt Warner was benched halfway through the season for Eli Manning despite having a winning record.  Eli proceeded to go 1-6 that season completing 48% of his passes.  So, despite the fact that Kurt Warner was clearly the better QB at the time, he was still benched. Because that's what is going to happen when you have the #1 overall QB behind you. That is exactly why Sam Bradford wants out of this situation.

1. So he's auditioning for a starting job on a terrible team that was always going to be terrible regardless of his ability to play well. Ok.

2. Maybe. Or maybe it could be said that Brees great play led to Antonio Gates breaking out and becoming the player he did. It was in 2004 that Gates broke out, the same year as Brees. Again, you're using hindsight to apply to a situation where a 3rd year player QB played well with a 2nd year UDFA TE on a team who just drafted a QB of the future to discredit it. LT was a beast, I get that but again, Brees didn't know what Gates would become, he didn't bitch and moan about competition. He got on with it, did a great job, forced the Chargers to use the franchise tag on him and found another job elsewhere that ultimately lead to a HOF career. Ignore the situation all you want, ignore the timing of everything that happened and repeatedly use hindsight to show the difference but all you're really doing is proving that Bradford doesn't have the mettle to get better and become a HOF QB and will always be a middling QB who needs the #1 job handed to him while he takes home a 100 million dollars with zero playoff births.

3, No. If Bradford played great and kept them in the playoff hunt, there is no chance at all they bench him for Wentz. None.

Kurt Warner was benched because he started 4-1 and then lost 3 of his next 4 while not playing particularly well. It was a mistake at the time and you would hope teams would learn from that. 

Either way, ultimate point is Bradford is a bitch and doesn't deserve to start anywhere in the league if he can't fight for his job. He has done nothing in this league to prove he's worthy of being an instant starter except take home a ridiculous amount of money. I get he's your brother but I'm not sure how you can truly defend his entitled attitude right now.

[sperry]

2 minutes ago, Mexal said:

1. So he's auditioning for a starting job on a terrible team that was always going to be terrible regardless of his ability to play well. Ok.

2. Maybe. Or maybe it could be said that Brees great play led to Antonio Gates breaking out and becoming the player he did. It was in 2004 that Gates broke out, the same year as Brees. Again, you're using hindsight to apply to a situation where a 3rd year player QB played well with a 2nd year UDFA TE on a team who just drafted a QB of the future to discredit it. LT was a beast, I get that but again, Brees didn't know what Gates would become, he didn't bitch and moan about competition. He got on with it, did a great job, forced the Chargers to use the franchise tag on him and found another job elsewhere that ultimately lead to a HOF career. Ignore the situation all you want, ignore the timing of everything that happened and repeatedly use hindsight to show the difference but all you're really doing is proving that Bradford doesn't have the mettle to get better and become a HOF QB and will always be a middling QB who needs the #1 job handed to him while he takes home a 100 million dollars with zero playoff births.

3, No. If Bradford played great and kept them in the playoff hunt, there is no chance at all they bench him for Wentz. None.

Kurt Warner was benched because he started 4-1 and then lost 3 of his next 4 while not playing particularly well. It was a mistake at the time and you would hope teams would learn from that. 

Either way, ultimate point is Bradford is a bitch and doesn't deserve to start anywhere in the league if he can't fight for his job. He has done nothing in this league to prove he's worthy of being an instant starter except take home a ridiculous amount of money. I get he's your brother but I'm not sure how you can truly defend his entitled attitude right now.

 

This team is BAD.  They are not going be in the playoff hunt, it doesn't matter who the QB is.  Management knows this, Bradford knows this.

 

Again, you keep saying this like it's a competition.  It isn't.  There is a 0% chance that Wentz beats out Bradford this year.  This isn't about beating him out.  He will play when he has learned the playbook and is comfortable in the offense. Bradford wants the opportunity to compete for the job, the problem is he's not being given that opportunity in Philadelphia.

 

Again, Philadelphia's incompetent management created this mess. Bradford was a free agent, they could have let him walk. Instead they resigned him, and then threw him under the bus. He is right to look out for himself, because management sure as shit isn't looking out for him.

[Jaime L]

2 minutes ago, sperry said:

I'm glad you brought up Kurt Warner.  Because Kurt Warner was benched halfway through the season for Eli Manning despite having a winning record.  Eli proceeded to go 1-6 that season completing 48% of his passes.  So, despite the fact that Kurt Warner was clearly the better QB at the time, he was still benched. Because that's what is going to happen when you have the #1 overall QB behind you. That is exactly why Sam Bradford wants out of this situation.

No question - it's obviously a bullshit competition. It's completely stacked against the veteran. Hell it happened to Warner again after this when he was supposed to just be the caretaker until Matt Leinart was ready. However Warner used that opportunity to so completely outperform Matt Leinart they had no choice but to start him going forward. 

It's proof that all the veteran can do is use this opportunity to put good film out there such that another team feels compelled to take a chance on him. There's always openings in the league for veterans who can play a little bit as the continued opportunities Fitzpatrick, Hoyer, Cassel etc. have received indicate.  

Worst thing he can do is ride the pine as a malcontent or demand a trade. All that does is make teams leery of a guy they'd otherwise consider giving the keys to. There could be a third act to his career as a starter, but he needs to play it right. 

[sperry]

1 minute ago, Jaime L said:

No question - it's obviously a bullshit competition. It's completely stacked against the veteran. Hell it happened to Warner again after this when he was supposed to just be the caretaker until Matt Leinart was ready. However Warner used that opportunity to so completely outperform Matt Leinart they had no choice but to start him going forward. 

It's proof that all the veteran can do is use this opportunity to put good film out there such that another team feels compelled to take a chance on him. There's always openings in the league for veterans who can play a little bit as the continued opportunities Fitzpatrick, Hoyer, Cassel etc. have received indicate.  

Worst thing he can do is ride the pine as a malcontent or demand a trade. All that does is make teams leery of a guy they'd otherwise consider giving the keys to. There could be a third act to his career as a starter, but he needs to play it right. 

 

Here's the deal, Bradford is fucked.  Kurt Warner was lucky that it worked out for him.  Bradford is trying to look out for himself by getting out of this situation that is disastrous for him career wise.  I'm unsure why there is this sentiment that Bradford should show loyalty to a franchise that just threw him under the bus.  This is a business, and the Eagles threw him to the wayside because they felt they had a better opportunity by drafting a rookie. Bradford is attempting to use the leverage of him being an $18 million hit on their cap while not playing to force a trade and get himself into a better situation. It's a smart move, and the idea of loyalty or obligation to a professional football team is completely laughable. If you are a pro football player, you've got to look out for number one. Playing for a bad team that is not trying to win is a disaster for him career wise. They aren't interested in helping him out, they are interested in getting their rookie QB out there and developing him.

[Jaime L]

6 minutes ago, sperry said:

 

Here's the deal, Bradford is fucked.  Kurt Warner was lucky that it worked out for him.  Bradford is trying to look out for himself by getting out of this situation that is disastrous for him career wise.  I'm unsure why there is this sentiment that Bradford should show loyalty to a franchise that just threw him under the bus.  This is a business, and the Eagles threw him to the wayside because they felt they had a better opportunity by drafting a rookie. Bradford is attempting to use the leverage of him being an $18 million hit on their cap while not playing to force a trade and get himself into a better situation. It's a smart move, and the idea of loyalty or obligation to a professional football team is completely laughable. If you are a pro football player, you've got to look out for number one. Playing for a bad team that is not trying to win is a disaster for him career wise. They aren't interested in helping him out, they are interested in getting their rookie QB out there and developing him.

Definitely not talking about loyalty here. I'm talking about Sam Bradford doing the best for Sam Bradford by using this opportunity to put good film out there.

And we disagree on the "good move" being trying to force a trade. Regardless of how bad the Eagles fucked him or were idiotic in chasing Wentz (and I'd agree with both) he's murdering his own brand by making this stand. It's a really bad look. And you see it in take after take in this thread and in the larger football world in general. When Brady Quinn of all people is saying you're coming off entitled...that ain't good. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

9 minutes ago, sperry said:

 

Here's the deal, Bradford is fucked.  Kurt Warner was lucky that it worked out for him.  Bradford is trying to look out for himself by getting out of this situation that is disastrous for him career wise.  I'm unsure why there is this sentiment that Bradford should show loyalty to a franchise that just threw him under the bus.  This is a business, and the Eagles threw him to the wayside because they felt they had a better opportunity by drafting a rookie. Bradford is attempting to use the leverage of him being an $18 million hit on their cap while not playing to force a trade and get himself into a better situation. It's a smart move, and the idea of loyalty or obligation to a professional football team is completely laughable. If you are a pro football player, you've got to look out for number one. Playing for a bad team that is not trying to win is a disaster for him career wise. They aren't interested in helping him out, they are interested in getting their rookie QB out there and developing him.

 It's not a smart move because it's going to make any potential trade partner leery of him. The only capital he has here is playing well. He's getting paid good money by the Eagles. He needs to shut up and put his nose to the grindstone.

[sperry]

1 hour ago, Jaime L said:

Definitely not talking about loyalty here. I'm talking about Sam Bradford doing the best for Sam Bradford by using this opportunity to put good film out there.

And we disagree on the "good move" being trying to force a trade. Regardless of how bad the Eagles fucked him or were idiotic in chasing Wentz (and I'd agree with both) he's murdering his own brand by making this stand. It's a really bad look. And you see it in take after take in this thread and in the larger football world in general. When Brady Quinn of all people is saying you're coming off entitled...that ain't good. 

 

 

His brand gets murdered when they inevitably replace him with Wentz after 8 games. His brand is 100% about how he plays.  Carson Palmer demanded a trade, sat out 7 regular season games, and was labeled a malcontent.  Then he goes to the Cardinals, plays well, and is now a franchise QB and pro bowler.  Nobody even remembers he demanded to be traded.

 

As for putting out good tape, again this is the point. He has already has 63 games worht of tape playing in a hopeless situation.  He needs the opportunity to prove that if you put him in a good sitaution he can perform well. He's already shown he can perform competently on awful teams.

[dbunting]

The strangest part of all of the Bradford crap is that he has never accomplished anything of note in the NFL and yet here are pages and pages of debate on him...

[Quijote Light]

I would argue that he's played passably, not competently.  

[Maithanet]

4 minutes ago, dbunting said:

The strangest part of all of the Bradford crap is that he has never accomplished anything of note in the NFL and yet here are pages and pages of debate on him...

It's really just Sperry who has been a huge fan of his since his Sooners days.  Every Bradford discussion is Sperry vs whoever feels like arguing about Bradford today. 

I will give Sperry credit for standing with his man, in the face of season after season of mediocrity from Bradford.  Some part of me wants to do the same with RG3, but the sad truth is that Griffin really hasn't been good since 2012, and there's a good chance he never will be again.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

It's really just Sperry who has been a huge fan of his since his Sooners days.  Every Bradford discussion is Sperry vs whoever feels like arguing about Bradford today. 

I will give Sperry credit for standing with his man, in the face of season after season of mediocrity from Bradford.  Some part of me wants to do the same with RG3, but the sad truth is that Griffin really hasn't been good since 2012, and there's a good chance he never will be again.

Jet fuel can't melt steel beams!!!!!!!!!

[Maithanet]

8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Jet fuel can't melt steel beams!!!!!!!!!

I really enjoyed the 9/11 conspiracy theory thread the forum had a year or two ago.  It was a great demonstration of how when you pick and choose facts, you can make a wrong argument sound surprisingly convincing. 

[sperry]

I find it amusing to argue with people on the subject. I also think that he's had a very interesting career, in that he has somehow managed to teeter on the edge of will he be a franchise quarterback for now 6 years in the NFL. Most guys through 6 years have either proven themselves as good or terrible.  Bradford has shown flashes, played competently, and has still never been in even a decent situation after 6 seasons.  So nobody still knows whether he'll ever reach his potential or not.

 

And stuff happening around him has made him a focal point of offseason conversation for the past two seasons.

[dbunting]

22 minutes ago, sperry said:

I find it amusing to argue with people on the subject. I also think that he's had a very interesting career, in that he has somehow managed to teeter on the edge of will he be a franchise quarterback for now 6 years in the NFL. Most guys through 6 years have either proven themselves as good or terrible.  Bradford has shown flashes, played competently, and has still never been in even a decent situation after 6 seasons.  So nobody still knows whether he'll ever reach his potential or not.

.

What if he already has hit his potential in the NFL?

[DanteGabriel]

1 hour ago, sperry said:

His brand gets murdered when they inevitably replace him with Wentz after 8 games. His brand is 100% about how he plays.  Carson Palmer demanded a trade, sat out 7 regular season games, and was labeled a malcontent.  Then he goes to the Cardinals, plays well, and is now a franchise QB and pro bowler.  Nobody even remembers he demanded to be traded.

One might consider that Carson Palmer and Sam Bradford had markedly different bodies of work prior to their trade demands.