Tuesday, April 22, 2014

7 comments MMQB Review: Peter King is Angered That Starbucks Expects Him to Wait in Line Edition

Peter King followed up his shameless pimping out of Alex Mack at the request of Marvin Demoff by telling us that Demoff did great by getting the Browns to give Mack $18 million guaranteed in the first two years of the contract, then acted like the Browns did Mack wrong by not signing him to a long-term deal until the Jags had made an offer to Mack. Because letting the market set Mack's value is the wrong thing to do and all. Peter also told us how Tom Savage was climbing draft boards because he has a good arm and he's a real workout warrior. In five years, we will remember this is how teams make mistakes, by over-analyzing prospects and focusing on measurables over performance on the field. This week Peter tells us about the "torturous" 2014 draft, gives his readers some more "hot guys" (his words, not mine) that teams are feeding him in order to create a smokescreen, and puts Starbucks in it's place for one of their thousand locations having too long of a line. Peter stopped there twice and had to wait really long in line. This madness must stop, because there is no other place on Earth for Peter to purchase coffee and he's too entitled to be forced to wait in line.

In my travels over the past week to watch Johnny Manziel game tape with people who know quarterbacks and quarterback play (more about that next week in Sports Illustrated and The MMQB),

What this means is Peter followed Johnny Manziel all weekend in the hopes Manziel would speak to him and remember their luncheon together a few weeks ago, praying the passion could be re-ignited. Alas, he only got to talk to those who "know" quarterback play about Manziel. What this means is there are certain people who fancy themselves quarterback experts, though if they were really that good at recognizing a quarterback who would be successful in the NFL these people would be employed by an NFL team. After all, quarterback is the most important position on the field and if a person really "knew" quarterbacks then this knowledge would be pretty valuable to an NFL franchise, no? So these are people who analyze and evaluate quarterbacks but don't "know" quarterbacks well enough to take this information and make accurate enough projections about that quarterback's performance in the NFL to where an NFL team would want to hire that person.

I had a coach tell me that trying to figure out which passer to pick this year is “torturous.” I’ll have a good chunk about the quarterback dilemma with one under-pressure general manager’s view of the QB market … and why he agrees with the “torturous” description.

This is as opposed to every other NFL Draft when there are a ton of sure-fire NFL-ready quarterbacks? Like you know, every other NFL Draft except maybe 17-18 over the last two decades.

Peter is already starting his whole movement towards "This NFL Draft is so unpredictable" statements. It's starting with there not being quarterbacks that most scouts can agree are the best in the draft and will end with Blake Bortles falling out of the first round as Peter marvels at how shockingly unpredictable this draft has been.

But 17 days before the draft begins (Lord help us: Seventeen more mind-numbing days of this), here’s what I’m hearing:

Here are the players that teams are lying to Peter about.

Houston, at No. 1, isn’t set on Jadeveon Clowney.

What? I thought the entire first 10 picks were already set? Consider me shocked. There's no way Clowney falls out of the Top 10 because he is one of the ten picks Peter stated earlier this year in MMQB was set already.

I still think the Texans would go with a more sure thing with the first overall pick than a quarterback—and that sure thing could also be tackle Greg Robinson.

I'm sorry, there is no reason not to draft Jadeveon Clowney #1 overall and take "a sure-thing" like Greg Robinson. None. At worst, Clowney is going to be a decently inconsistent pass-rusher. Don't over-think this Texans. If you like Clowney, take him.

But imagine Mack, the outside linebacker from the University of Buffalo, being the first pick in a stacked draft. Wouldn’t that be something—a second straight Mid-American Conference player (Eric Fisher, Central Michigan, by Kansas City) as the top pick in the NFL draft?

Gosh, that would be real super-special.

Detroit taking a tight end? I doubt it, but North Carolina tight end Eric Ebron, the clear top player at the position in this year’s draft, was asked by one team he visited recently who he thought would pick him. “Detroit,’’ he said.

Unfortunately, because Ebron went to UNC and got the typical quality education their athletes get Ebron thinks Detroit is in Wisconsin and he meant that he thought the Packers would draft him.

Pittsburgh likes Odell Beckham and Brandin Cooks at wide receiver, and one or both should be there at No. 15 if that’s the direction the Steelers go—and they need to replenish the position after losing two receivers in free agency in two years. (I’d go corner if I were GM Kevin Colbert.)

Does anybody really believe Peter has accurate knowledge on which receivers the Steelers like? Why would this be public information at this point when every other NFL team is lying about who they want to draft?

Tampa Bay is partial to, among others, Texas A&M wide receiver Mike Evans at No. 7. I’ve watched a lot of Johnny Manziel tape recently, and I’ll say this about Evans: supremely talented, extremely hot-headed. He’d better cure his immaturity on the field, and fast.

Vincent Jackson and Mike Evans on either side of the field is just unfair.

Hot guys right now:

"Zac Efron, the guys from One Direction, Ryan Gosling sort of, and any those guys playing the male lead in the 25 movies about a girl in a post-apocalyptic world trying to overcome tyranny in order to save this post-apocalyptic world."

Ohio State linebacker Ryan Shazier, Notre Dame tackle/guard Zack Martin, Boise State defensive end Demarcus Lawrence. Cold guys right now: Louisville quarterback Teddy Bridgewater, UCLA linebacker Anthony Barr, Alabama tackle Cyrus Kouandjio.

Considering no NFL teams are telling the truth this time of year, who is "hot" and who is "cold" doesn't mean shit. All this tells me is Teddy Bridgewater may go #1 overall since I know teams are lying right now.

Oakland? Clueless there. Sorry, Black Hole people.

This is as opposed to the other spots in the draft where Peter knows EXACTLY which players will be drafted.

It is a torturous decision, as the coach of a quarterback-needy team told me. As a GM, if you take a quarterback in the first round, any of them, you’re going to go home and not sleep well that night. If you pass on a quarterback with some spellbinding tools—Manziel, for instance—you’re going to go home and not sleep well that night, fearing what you’ve passed up.

It's like this in nearly every other draft as well. There are very, very rarely "sure-thing" quarterbacks available. Andrew Luck was a sure-thing and Peyton Manning was also. Otherwise, there has been no quarterbacks a team can draft and sleep well at night knowing they have chosen the right guy with no regrets.

“The torture part of it,’’ said Spielman, “is you see a player sitting there when you pick who you know can help you right away, a significant player at another position, an impact player as a rookie. Then you ask yourself, ‘How do we feel about our options at quarterback in the second or third round? Is it close? Is there a big separation, or is it close?’

Nearly every team has to do this with the draft choice they make. My favorite team has about six needs they need to address in the draft (guard, tackle, wide receiver, defensive end, cornerback, safety) and if they see a guy sitting there late in the first round they have to ask themselves how they feel about their options at the other positions of need. It's life as a GM and Rick Spielman seems to be working hard to pretend it's a huge deal, most likely because he knows if he fucks up another pick (I know he wasn't the GM when the Vikings drafted Ponder but he "oversaw" the draft where Ponder was taken...whatever that means) at quarterback then someone else will be choosing the next franchise quarterback for Minnesota in the next 2-3 years.

“That’s a big reason why we made it a high priority to sign Matt Cassel back. Every one of these quarterbacks … nothing is a sure thing. There’s no Andrew Luck, no Peyton Manning.

There very rarely is a Luck or Manning just sitting in the draft. Rick Spielman makes me laugh.

It is such a mixed bag with each player—every one of them has positives, every one of them has negatives.

Shut the hell up and choose your franchise quarterback. We understand your job is on the line if the Vikings quarterback situation doesn't get better. Don't use your media contacts to make it seem like you don't get paid to make these tough decisions.

“I agree with that coach, whoever it is. It is torturous this year.”

It's torturous every year when it comes to choosing a quarterback.

“Ideally,’’ said Spielman, “if we did pick a quarterback this year we would want to redshirt him anyway, and when he’d be ready to go, he’d play. But he’d probably use this year as a learning year.

Another year of Matt Cassel Vikings fans. Don't act like you're not excited.

I asked Spielman about the pressure of picking a quarterback in a year when all of them have zits.
“There’s always pressure,’’ he said. “This year, there’s more.’’

No, there's not. There's just more pressure on you because this is the year you have to pick a quarterback as the GM of the Vikings.

This year reminds me of 2011. In fact, GMs should learn from that year. Check out the quarterbacks picked in the top 100 that year:

1. Cam Newton, Carolina
8. Jake Locker, Tennessee        
10. Blaine Gabbert, Jacksonville  
12. Christian Ponder, Minnesota        
35. Andy Dalton, Cincinnati
36. Colin Kaepernick, San Francisco  
74. Ryan Mallett, New England

My point: Don’t put the pressure on Teddy Bridgewater or Blake Bortles by picking them so high. Pick a surer thing in the first round, then a quarterback from a large pool in the second round. Or third.

I like how Peter cherry-picks the year 2012 so that he makes it seem like quality quarterbacks can be found in Rounds 2-3 every single season. Here are the quarterbacks selected in Rounds 2 and 3 (and how many QB's drafted later than that have made an impact) since 2008:

2008: Brian Brohm, Chad Henne, Kevin O'Connell (Josh Johnson, Matt Flynn)
2009: Pat White (no other quarterback drafted has made an impact)
2010: Jimmy Clausen, Colt McCoy (Mike Kafka and John Skelton in Rounds 4 and 5)
2012: Brock Osweiler, Nick Foles, Russell Wilson (Kirk Cousins, Ryan Lindley in Rounds 4 and 6)

I didn't include the 2013 draft, but you can see that Peter's insistence quality quarterbacks are available in Rounds 2 or 3 isn't false, but it's pretty hit or miss depending on the draft. That large pool in the 2nd round may end up being a large pool of crap.

Just as in 2012, when the Seahawks (Russell Wilson, 73rd overall pick) and the Eagles (Nick Foles (88th) picked quarterbacks at the right time, teams could do the same this year. Should do the same, really.

Oh really, they should do the same? What about 2009 or 2010 when there were no good quarterbacks available in the later rounds. How about 2008 when the best it got after Round 1 was Matt Flynn? Of course, why wouldn't Peter use one year of data to try and prove a point he believes to be universally true.

To further prove my point, look at the pile of crap available after Round 1 in the 2006 and 2007 drafts. Interesting how Peter doesn't really go too far back to prove his point and only uses one year's worth of a sample size.

Remembering Pat Tillman … and his case for Canton

Tillman is a unique player, and man, in recent NFL history. The only time I ever spoke with him was an hour or so before a Cardinals practice in 1998, in Tempe, Ariz. Tillman was a rookie safety, drafted in the seventh round from Arizona State to the team that was just a couple of miles from where he went to college. And he showed up for work that day—and for our interview—riding a 10-speed bike.

Veteran Peter King readers will know that Peter took an immediate liking to Pat Tillman due to his precociousness of riding a 10-speed bike to an interview. The closer a grown man acts like a child, the more Peter likes that grown man. And no, that's not creepy at all.

That’s the only player I ever interviewed who arrived on a bike.

Though things did get awkward when Peter asked Tillman if they could rid tandem on the bike.

Now, I hadn’t thought of the Hall of Fame part of it in several years, until Cris Collinsworth Tweeted this on Sunday, after ESPN ran a tribute to Tillman:

Collinsworth and I have discussed this. He remains unconvinced by my argument, which is this: Should all 26 NFL players who have died in service to our country—either in World War II, Vietnam or Afghanistan—be enshrined in Canton? Is one NFL player’s service worth more than others’?

And of course this one Tweet had made Peter completely change his stance on this issue. Just something about Cris Collinsworth living to a million years old that put it in perspective for Peter. Or did it make Peter change his mind?

And what about others who played football and went on to great things? Byron “Whizzer” White, a running back in the NFL, went on to be a Supreme Court justice. Jack Kemp quarterbacked the Bills, then became a nine-term Congressman and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Should they be in?

I think football players and coaches and executives should be in the Hall of Fame for what they accomplish as football players and coaches and executives, and not for anything else.

But this Tweet it was so classy and well-put. If Cris Collinsworth had Tweeted this while riding on a 10-speed bicycle I bet Peter would change his mind about putting Pat Tillman in the Hall of Fame.

“I really just should have coached the team, but he [owner Randy Lerner] didn’t want me to.”
—Former Browns president Mike Holmgren to me last week, on whether he had any regrets about his years in Cleveland.

I'm sure that's how it went down. Mike Holmgren was all like, "I'll totally coach this team. Give me a shot" and Randy Lerner was all like, "Nah, I think we'll stick with Eric Mangini, but we are perfectly fine with you making key decisions about the organization's direction but definitely don't want you coaching the team. Because that makes sense given the fact you've been a successful head coach in the NFL and have less experience making key decisions about an organization's future." Then Holmgren was like, "Okay, well that probably works out well because I'm a quarterback guru and I am definitely taking Colt McCoy and then Brandon Weeden to prove my guru-ness."

But no really, I believe it was Browns management that held Holmgren back from coaching the team. They would much rather he have hired Pat Shurmur and have Eric Mangini on the sidelines rather than Holmgren coach the team. Sounds to me like Holmgren is still sort of trying to explain his failure in Cleveland by blaming Browns management. After all, no one would expect Browns management to be competent and it's easier to explain it's the fault of Randy Lerner that Holmgren didn't succeed in Cleveland than to blame himself.

Then for his "Stat of the Week" Peter puts up a chart showing which quarterbacks they have drafted in the first three rounds since 2001 and then shows a player the Raiders could have drafted instead. While his point stands, any NFL team could look back in a few years and see a few players they should have selected instead of a player they did pick. I do get Peter's point, but saying the Raiders could have had Calvin Johnson in 2007 over JaMarcus Russell ignores the fact the Raiders wouldn't have had a quarterback to throw Johnson the football and stating the Raiders could have had Nick Foles over Terrelle Pryor ignores that Pryor was a compensatory selection so the Raiders didn't actually choose Pryor over Foles. They just didn't get a chance to make a choice in the 3rd round due to have spent the pick on Terrelle Pryor.

Really the Raiders should just hire one of those people that Peter talks to who "know" NFL quarterbacks. 

It was good to be in Boston Friday, watching the city prepare for such an important, healing event—this morning’s Boston Marathon. In the Hynes Convention Center, where runners and their families were picking up racing bibs and going from booth to booth to shoe and apparel and nutrition companies, the mood was bright. The One Fund, which had a goal of $10 million for those injured and affected by the terrorist attack last year, has raised $70 million and is still going strong. The city was packed with joggers and walkers and people excited for the marathon to be back. I met a San Diegan,

San Diego-ites? San Diego-ins? San Diego-uns? Either way, it means "a whale's vagina."

64 years old, who was new to marathoning and was surprised to find out last year he qualified for Boston because he ran a qualifying time in his age group in a San Diego race. “I had to come,’’ 

That's what she said. 

he said.

No, that's what SHE said. Geez, Peter get it right. I thought you liked "The Office."

No, I think people get that Savage could be a good quarterback in 3-4 years (when he will be 27-28 years old by the way). It's just that there is some confusion as to why a developmental quarterback project would be taken in the first two rounds of the draft. Specifically since Savage skipped around in college and never really put up memorable numbers. No due respect to Adam Caplan, but Savage seems like the typical "he looks like a top-tier QB prospect so I'm sure it won't be a problem to turn him into one" candidate that gets over-drafted.

Ten Things I Think I Think

1. I think Arizona will take a quarterback in the first two rounds.

If you look at the history of quarterback taken in the 2nd round and beyond, then ignore that history and only pay attention to the 2012 draft then you could see there are always plenty of good quarterbacks available after Round 1.

2. I think the Rams will take a quarterback in the first three rounds.

And it will undoubtedly be the most brilliant draft pick in the first three rounds.

3. I think you shouldn’t be surprised at that last one.

I think you shouldn't be surprised that we aren't surprised. In fact, you probably shouldn't even have to tell your readers they shouldn't be surprised, because I'm betting a lot of them are not.

Has Sam Bradford done enough to be untouchable in his four seasons with the Rams (18-30-1 record, 58.6 completion percentage, 6.3 yards per attempt)? I don’t think so.

I think a lot of people know this and you may be one of the last people who need convincing that Bradford isn't "the guy" for the Rams. If I'm the Rams I may draft a quarterback in the 1st round if there was a quarterback I liked enough to do so.

5. I think I chuckle when the Lions say they are not concerned about Ndamukong Suh skipping Detroit’s off-season workout program as he tries to work out a new contract with the team. It is 111 days since the season ended and Suh was last with his team. The Lions have a new coach, and a new defensive coordinator, and a new defensive line coach. Suh is the best player on the defense. Not concerned?

That's what they say. Not that it isn't a big deal, but Suh is a defensive tackle, so while it is a big deal for him to work with the new coaching staff his job duties probably won't be terribly different since it doesn't appear the Lions are moving to a 3-4 defense. It's a big deal, but the fact Suh isn't with the team probably won't put him far behind come time for training camp.

More importantly, who will be the next Josh Freeman for Peter King? Who is the next NFL player who Peter rags on mercilessly every week for no good reason other than his mere existence doesn't match the expectations Peter has for that player? Will it be Ndamukong Suh?

The correct quote, if club president Tom Lewand was on truth serum, would be something like, Pretty lousy start to our off-season program when our best defensive player’s a no-show—particularly when he’s the guy who most has to buy into the new staff since he’s going to be the highest-paid defensive player in our history. Yeah, we’re ticked off. Wouldn’t you be?

This would be a valid point. Going from a football-only perspective as Peter just did, it's not quite as big of a deal.

9. I think the draft should be Thursday, not two weeks from Thursday.

Yes, we know Peter. You don't think the draft should be pushed back two weeks. If the draft wasn't pushed back two weeks then how would we ever know that "hot guys" like Tom Savage are shooting up draft boards? There has to be more time for NFL teams to over-think the draft process and then have Peter point out breathlessly which players teams claim are falling or rising in an effort to create misinformation.

10. I think these are my non-football thoughts of the week:

c. Great note on the FOX baseball telecast Saturday: The Angels have not been over .500 since opening day 2013. That is amazingly preposterous.

I don't understand why this is amazingly preposterous. Is it because the Angels are supposed to be good on paper, so that means it's preposterous that the expectations for them based on how good they look on paper don't match reality? If so, perhaps this is an indication Peter shouldn't base his expectations on how good a team looks on paper.

e. I’ve always felt the biggest thing wrong with the NBA, from very much an outsider’s perspective, is how bad teams embrace losing so it will help them rebuild.

MLB teams that aren't very good trade away their best players at the trade deadline every year in order to get prospects back. Every year, there are teams who quit prior to August and start embracing losing so that it will help them rebuild. For some reason Peter (and others) doesn't think about this when criticizing NBA teams for intentionally losing. I recognize there is a difference in the NBA and MLB, but every year bad teams consciously make themselves worse by trading their best players on the hopes they receive players in return who make them better in the future. Yet, this doesn't bother Peter. Maybe he just doesn't have enough of an outsider's perspective to be so intelligent about MLB as he believes he sounds about the NBA.

The 76ers used this year to get into the best situation for the future, which involved clearing out the roster and losing as much as possible to be in the best draft position in 2014. Imagine being a Sixers fan, knowing your team hopes it doesn’t win many games, and asking you to pay regular prices for tickets to see a bad team. 

Does Peter mean sort of what the Marlins do every third year or so? Or does Peter mean what the Royals have seemingly done to their fan base for the past decade? Baseball teams trade their best players and get prospects in return all the time, yet they ask their fans to pay regular price for tickets to see a bad team. I understand it's no fun to watch a team who is tanking, but I often think a lot of this "I don't like the NBA because teams tank" talk is just a cheap excuse for why Peter (and others) doesn't like the NBA. It's okay to just not like the NBA.

h. Who’s going to start the Giancarlo-to-Boston-for-young-pitching rumors?


But I guess it's okay for the Marlins to do this as long as the Red Sox are the team that benefits from the Marlins clearing out the roster in order to improve their team in the future.

j. Coffeenerdness: Memo to Starbucks: If you care about quality, please address the situation at your BWI Airport locations. You’ve got some very long lines there, if a couple of stops last week are any indication.

"Starbucks: Fix this continuing problem at the airport location that I'm not entirely sure is a real continuing problem because I've only visited the location two times."

Starbucks, if you think Peter King is going to wait in line to get one of the seven cups of coffee he craves on a daily basis, then you have another thing coming. Well, he will wait in line, but he's going to be very angry because nobody puts Peter King in a long line. Long lines are for people who are applying for welfare, food stamps and someone who has time to stand around like a normal middle-class person. Does Peter look like a normal middle-class person? I think not.

m. Shouldn’t ESPN’s “Sports Reporters” show be called “Sports Columnists?”

Shouldn't CNNSI's "The MMQB" be called something different from the column "MMQB" that appears on "The MMQB" web site?

n. You’ve still got it, “Veep.”

I'm sure the creator is thrilled he has your appreciation and validation that he's doing a good job still.

The Adieu Haiku

Hey Mel! Mel Kiper!
I miss my “Draft Report” book.
Bring it back next year.

This haiku is weaker than the coffee McDonald's sells. Amirightorwhat Peter?


Snarf said...

Of course Peter thinks Giancarlo-for-ambiguous "young pitching" is a logical move for one of the 28 (27? are the Dodgers allowed in the Yankees-Sox level of acknowledgement now?) AAAA teams to make, since it would benefit the Sox.

Anonymous said...

Ahh, for those halcyon days when drafting QBs was easy-breezy. Vince Young and Matt Leinart, those were some risk-free QBs. JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn, as sure-fire as they come. Tim Couch, Akili Smith, Cade McNown, get those bronze statues ready for Canton, am I right?

What a flippin' joke. Who the hell thinks drafting a QB is ever easy? Peter and Rick Spielman, apparently. I'l let Peter in on a little secret; there is no such thing as a safe pick at any position. Go check out old scouting reports for Robert Gallery (GOOGLE OR BING IT, as Peter would say), and all you'll see is how "safe" of a pick he was. Robert Gallery was a disaster of a left tackle who had to be moved inside. A.J. Hawk was a "safe" pick as well, and while he's had a long career, I would not at all call him a good player. Vernon Davis went one pick later, and while he was considered riskier, he's also been much better. Matt Leinart was viewed as a thousand times safer than Jay Cutler. I could go on and on, the point is there's no such thing as a safe choice. Peter's been around the draft long enough that he should realize this, but he apparently can't dislodge his cranium from his rectal area.

If I were Bob McNair and my people were even considering a tackle with the #1 pick, I would fire everyone pronto. This draft has QBs, pass rushers, receivers, and you're going to take a flippin' tackle? They already have Duane Brown! How does Greg Robinson make Houston one iota better?

Slag-King said...

More importantly, who will be the next Josh Freeman for Peter King? Who is the next NFL player who Peter rags on mercilessly every week for no good reason other than his mere existence doesn't match the expectations Peter has for that player?

I think Peter already has a Josh Freeman in mind with Teddy Bridgewater. He's already dissed him twice in this MMQB alone: cold stock and needs time to adjust?!? Ugh! I'm going to be a Teddy fan just because Peter seems to determine that Teddy is a failure.

Or he would say that the drafting QB is so unpredictable.

Bengoodfella said...

Snarf, I think the Dodgers are in there now. Not every Red Sox fan thinks like Peter does, but he pretty much helps create the stereotype of a fan of a big market team who only thinks the other MLB teams are feeder squads.

Anon, but it's not a good story if Peter writes "It's never easy to find a QB in the draft" and it also doesn't over-focus on the immediacy of THIS YEAR'S QB class and how hard it is to differentiate "the best" QB in the class.

I would not draft Greg Robinson #1 and I'm a person who has absolutely no problem taking any position #1 in the draft if it is a position of need. Draft Clowney or a quarterback if there is one they like more than Clowney.

This stuff happens every year where this draft is SO CRAZY and nobody knows anything. It's all the same every year. It's just boring to write that.

Slag, I'm a Teddy fan anyway. He's the same size as RG3 except he isn't a QB who likes to run so I think that gives him a good chance of staying healthy. I hope Peter doesn't hate on Bridgewater like he does Freeman, though you are probably right.

Anonymous said...

"If I'm the Rams I may draft a quarterback in the 1st round if there was a quarterback I liked enough to do so."

I don't know about that. While Bradford hasn't been a "franchise quarterback" he is still a competent player. The biggest problem with Bradford is that he is injury prone.

Keep in mind that the Rams have failed to draft an above average offensive player since they selected Steven Jackson in the 2004 draft. Bradford has played behind a suspect offensive line his entire career in the NFl and has been throwing the ball to sub-par receivers since he has entered the league.

Bradford has been disappointing but it's not like he is surrounded by a bunch of pro bowl caliber players. He was having a very efficient season last year until he tore his ACL.

Eric Long said...

I hate Peter King's face! Now he's bitching about lines at Starbucks. What an a-hole.

Bengoodfella said...

Anon, I think you hit on the problem though. Bradford is injury-prone. If the Rams like a quarterback then I think they should draft one in the 1st round. They can't just keep hoping Bradford stays healthy. I will acknowledge they haven't always put great talent around him, but it's sort of the "chicken-or-the-egg" situation where Bradford hasn't exactly made the talent around him better like a franchise QB is supposed to do.

I think Bradford is competent, but if the Rams think they can find a better QB in the draft I think they should take him. They have two 1st round picks again and Bradford can't stay healthy. Continuing to rely on him to be healthy doesn't seem smart and he hasn't shown himself to be a franchise guy at this point.

I think the option should be out there, that's all.

Eric, he has been there twice too. He has no idea if it's a real problem or not.