indiragandhi'sthong Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Bradford to me has upside. He has had little in the way of support ... lousy line, few receivers, and Steven Jackson a few years back. Change of scenery could work wonders.
Momentoftrth Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 I feel like Bradford has a longer resume of playing time and shwon he can play, but also a longer resume of showing he has trouble staying healthy. That being said, I'd be OK with Bradford, and maybe Sanchez as an additional backup That's not a receipt for disaster.... Not at all LOL. I think if Rex brings in Sanchez the Buffalo fan base stages a mutiny.
Formerly Allan in MD Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 You better not sign an injury prone quarterback unless you'll have an offensive line that can protect him.
Wsam4031 Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 I dont understand the fascination with Bradford. When he plays he has been average and you cant count on him. Wed pay prob around 10mil a year to get him and he would play 3 or 4 games maybe. Dude is made of glass
Deranged Rhino Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 I dont understand the fascination with Bradford. When he plays he has been average and you cant count on him. Wed pay prob around 10mil a year to get him and he would play 3 or 4 games maybe. Dude is made of glass He's been above average when healthy with flashes of more. No one is arguing the Bills should take him at a current contract number, but if you can get him for cheaper then he's the most attractive fa candidate out there for the position. His injuries are a concern, which is why the deal would have to be insentivized to protect the team, but his injuries might be flukes. Or, he could be made of glass (I have to concede that). All that said, to me, Bradford is a risk worth taking considering the alternatives available... Only if the price is right though.
BuffaloBaumer Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Anyone who complains about Sam Bradford after looking at our QB roster right now should have their head examined.
metzelaars_lives Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Come on over to Buffalo, Mr. Bradford! Foles is awful. A quarterback one year removed from his first season as a full time starter during which he threw for 27 TD's and 2 INT's is "awful." Got it.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 A quarterback one year removed from his first season as a full time starter during which he threw for 27 TD's and 2 INT's is "awful." Got it. I watched him in college and in Philly, Foles is a product of Kelly's system in the NFL and more fragile than Bradford possibly. He's not a franchise QB in my estimation, not by a long shot.
John from Riverside Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Meh. Bradford isn't anything special either. Bradford was just starting to get his game together before that last injury....... In a season of no QB choices that look spectacular....this would be a shining light
metzelaars_lives Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) I agree with you up until the point about Sanchez. I want no part of Sanchez, he's a turn over machine. I'd rather roll into the season with EJ and Tuel than Sanchez. You're crazy. I'm not saying Sanchez is the answer either- personally I'd prefer Bradford, Foles, RGIII, Carson Palmer (if somehow the Cardinals decided to go in a different direction or something) but dude, at the very least you wouldn't want Sanchez to come in and compete with EJ? You'd honestly prefer Jeff Tuel? And is a "turnover machine" any worse than a "refuses to throw the ball downfield" machine? Edited January 26, 2015 by metzelaars_lives
Uffalo Ills Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 http://www.csnphilly.com/blog/700-level/report-st-louis-rams-interested-trading-nick-foles?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo Bills interested also? Maybe Bradford to the Bills? I want Foles!!! not Sam Made-of-Glass Bradford. Of the 2, both have a very small amount of game tape, but honestly, Foles is tons more impressive...
Deranged Rhino Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Bradford was just starting to get his game together before that last injury....... In a season of no QB choices that look spectacular....this would be a shining light I'm with you. There aren't many options out there and of those Bradford checks a lot of boxes: -- Still young enough to have a two contract career with Buffalo (27 years old) -- The "light went on" during his last stretch, or at least appeared to. -- Will be incredibly motivated to shed the injury prone label and reassert himself as a QB in this league. He's absolutely an injury risk. But compared to the baggage that other options such as Sanchez, Cutler, or Foles would bring, I'd rather see One Bills Drive take a chance on the guy with the most upside.
metzelaars_lives Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 I watched him in college and in Philly, Foles is a product of Kelly's system in the NFL and more fragile than Bradford possibly. He's not a franchise QB in my estimation, not by a long shot. So if EJ Manuel went to Philly, do you think he would be capable of throwing 27 TD's and 2 INT's in a 12 game span?
DirtDart Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Meh. Bradford isn't anything special either. Bradford is one injury away from retirement.
Deranged Rhino Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 You're crazy. I'm not saying Sanchez is the answer either- personally I'd prefer Bradford, Foles, RGIII, Carson Palmer (if somehow the Cardinals decided to go in a different direction or something) but dude, at the very least you wouldn't want Sanchez to come in and compete with EJ? You'd honestly prefer Jeff Tuel? And is a "turnover machine" any worse than a "refuses to throw the ball downfield" machine? I assure you, I don't want to roll into the season with just Tuel and EJ at all. But I'd rather than than to have Sanchez on this roster, that's just a demonstration of how much I loathe Sanchez as my team's QB. Kelly sums up his play best: (paraphrased) he throws a good ball but makes the worst decisions at the worst times consistently. He took over a loaded Philly team, with arguably one of the best offensive minds in the NFL running the show, and he didn't make the playoffs. EJ and Tuel need to be improved upon, but Sanchez, to me, doubles down on awful at the position. So if EJ Manuel went to Philly, do you think he would be capable of throwing 27 TD's and 2 INT's in a 12 game span? He might. I'd rather see what EJ can do in year three than give it to Foles. I really don't like Foles' game. EJ, prior to St. Doug's proselytizing the young man into someone afraid to run or throw, had a lot of tools. I haven't given up on EJ being serviceable in this league -- I don't think it's probable right now, but not impossible. Foles is a middling QB in my mind. We need to upgrade the position, but Foles is not that. He's a lateral move at best.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 http://www.csnphilly.com/blog/700-level/report-st-louis-rams-interested-trading-nick-foles?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo Bills interested also? Maybe Bradford to the Bills? Fisher is on record saying he wants to keep Bradford (assuming he will renegotiate) and bring in competition. They owe Bradford $13M, which is an awful lot to pay a guy who basically hasn't shown anything. So if Bradford won't renegotiate, do you want to pay him that much? I'm sure the Rams would like Foles. According to that article so would the Texans and the Titans and I'm sure you can add to the list. So it comes down to seller's market and what do you want to give up for him, to compete successfully with the other teams that would like to give something up for him....IF he is available. IMO, all the stuff about Foles being available comes down to the notion that Kelly covets is UoO QB Mariota. Remember when it was all over the news that Marrone would have the Bills draft Nassib? In Kelly's case, there may be more justification for wanting Mariota, but look at what the Redskins had to give up to move up, what, 4 slots for RGIII when the Rams already had Bradford. Now we're talking what, move up 19 slots, from teams that don't have a QB? How is that going to happen?
Kelly the Dog Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 About the only guy Sanchez is better than in the league is Jeff Tuel. I kid, I kid. Sort of.
4merper4mer Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Bradford is better than Foles, more experience and has (possibly) a much higher ceiling. What Bradford has going against him is a large contract and a very long history of injury. He's a HUGE risk at his current number... but if the Bills can get him for cheaper, Bradford has the best upside of any of the FA QB possibilities out there in my opinion. I totally agree. Foles just has never looked great to me....better than Sanchez....Bradford I see as high risk, high reward
John Adams Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 I agree with you up until the point about Sanchez. I want no part of Sanchez, he's a turn over machine. I'd rather roll into the season with EJ and Tuel than Sanchez. Stop it. There is no Tuel. The myth of Tuel is like the myth of Marcus Easley.
Recommended Posts