What would you trade for...

[Neophyte]

Sam Bradford.

This article in the Washington Post suggests that the Rams might be by far the worst team in the league, which is very possible. Further, it suggests that if the Rams were to get the #1 pick in next year's draft (something I consider somewhat likely), they would take Luck and trade Bradford.

So, would you do it? And if you would do it, what would you give up?

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

i would give them a first and conditional pick in the next draft.

 

[Goaldeje]

Interesting possibility Neo. I was listening to ESPN Radio today in the car, and there is a lot of speculation out there that if the Colts get the Number 1 pick, Peyton might lobby them against Luck, or demand a trade. All specualtion, of course.

To answer your question, I would need to see how the rest of the year plays out. Most are saying Bradford seems to have regressed slightly; if that trend continues, I would consider offering 2 #2's. If he improves, I might bump it to a first and a third or something like that. I know everyone will cite the Carson Palmer deal, but that was the Raiders. They're crazy.

I'll pose the question back to you, Neo (others can play too if they want): what would you trade for Peyton Manning, were that scenario to play out?

 

[Neophyte]

I don't think the Colts would trade Manning, Goal. Not for anything.

 

[Goaldeje]

I don't think the Colts would trade Manning, Goal. Not for anything.

I mostly agree. I depends on how much of businessman Polian and Irsay are, and how much of a fuss Peyton would/might make if they were in that position.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I actually had this thought the other day - Rams could take Luck, trade Bradford for a first, and select a playmaker for Luck to throw too or an OL to protect him. It would make a lot of sense, especially if they're not happy with Bradford's regression.

 

[Neophyte]

I actually had this thought the other day - Rams could take Luck, trade Bradford for a first, and select a playmaker for Luck to throw too or an OL to protect him. It would make a lot of sense, especially if they're not happy with Bradford's regression.

Exactly. At the rate a lot of QB needy teams are going, the Rams could have 2 picks in the Top 10 in '12 and perhaps another 2 picks in the Top 20 in '13. Maybe more. And have a better looking payroll sheet to boot.

 

[Goaldeje]

Interestingly, a lot of people think he has regressed quite a bit. Looks like he may miss this weekend's game:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...radford-for-second-week?campaign=Twitter_news


The financial considerations you mention Neo are interesting. Going from Bradford's $50M guaranteed to half that has to be something they will consider. But I would think that might make trading Bradford a little harder, depending on the team. If you are a GM and you have a top ten pick next year, and know you aren't getting Luck, but are confident one of the other QBs coming out will suceed, why would you take on Bradford's monster contract, especially when he hasn't played well this year (so far)?

 

[Neophyte]

I guess the question is if you think he has regressed or if the change in system and people around him have caused the issues and frankly, I haven't seen enough of the Rams to know one way or the other.

 

[Chris]

I would like to know more about Peyton's condition. Admitting that this is based on absolutely no knowledge whatsoever, I believe that Peyton is done, that the Colt's know it, and that they have been intentionally carrying out a plan to select his heir apparent in next years draft.

There is no way that team is this bad. Irsay is in acute Dr. Evil mode and Peyton, playing along with the ruse, will retire without playing another down.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled thread.

 

[servumtuum]

I remember watching the Redskins/Rams game how many times I saw a "deer-in-the-headlights" look in Bradford's face. Our rush rattled and confused him.

What would I give up for him?

A third in 2012 and a conditional in 2013 nothing more.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

I havent watched him much, I was basing it on last year really. but serv might be right, he might be getting david Carr's disease

 

[Ax]

I remember watching the Redskins/Rams game how many times I saw a "deer-in-the-headlights" look in Bradford's face. Our rush rattled and confused him.

That's why I voted Oh, Hell No.

Add to the regression, the ultimate confidence killer, being traded so soon, and the way Dimwit Nation would react if he injured that shoulder 2 seconds after we signed him? No thanks.

Don't need his big contract either.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I agree Bradford had a bit of the "deer in the headlights" look going on, however I think he's got the skill and talent to bounce back (unlike a David Carr or Patrick Ramsey, who just weren't talented enough to overcome the shell-shock).

 

[Burgundy Burner]

Uh, no. We can get our franchise QB in the first round of this upcoming draft (liking Griffin more and more) AND keep all of our draft picks for things like OL. With another good round of FA, we could be much further along as opposed to giving away drafts picks - been there, done that.

Let's choose our own stud at QB and get the building blocks needed for him to succeed. No trade is my vote. The only way a trade happens is if the Rams are willing to give us a decent deal for moving to the first overall pick. If we have a reasonable shot at Luck, we should take it.

 

[riggins44]

I wouldn't give a #1 for Bradford. Like Stafford, not sure if he can hold up for 16 games.

Everyone thinks Indy will hold the keys to Luck. The smart move would be for the Colts to take Luck and let him learn under Manning. Not often you have the chance to draft a QB with Luck's potential with a guy like Peyton on the roster.

You have to give the Packers credit for having the guts to do this when drafted Rogers.

Back to topic...think Bradford is missing some guys (WR's) which were his security blanket. I believe the guy was Amendola.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Back to topic...think Bradford is missing some guys (WR's) which were his security blanket. I believe the guy was Amendola.

Key point - imagine what he could do with a security blanket like Moss or Davis, and a pass-blocking RB like Hightower?

 

[Fear The Spear]

I would like to know more about Peyton's condition. Admitting that this is based on absolutely no knowledge whatsoever, I believe that Peyton is done, that the Colt's know it, and that they have been intentionally carrying out a plan to select his heir apparent in next years draft.

There is no way that team is this bad. Irsay is in acute Dr. Evil mode and Peyton, playing along with the ruse, will retire without playing another down.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled thread.

I don't buy this "purposely tanking the season" theory or "suck for Luck" one single bit.
It's about as plausible as some of the most extreme conspiracy theories.
It makes for great conversation and drama, but that's where it ends. There's NO substance to it.

 

[Chris]

I don't buy this "purposely tanking the season" theory or "suck for Luck" one single bit.
It's about as plausible as some of the most extreme conspiracy theories.
It makes for great conversation and drama, but that's where it ends. There's NO substance to it.

That type of thinking is exactly what makes Irsay's plan so brilliant.

 

[fansince62]

in half a little lamb's heartbeat!

recall that Shanahan stated he thought a Bradford comes along once every 10 years.

the dude is on a horrible team at the moment. good move for both teams.