Do/Should the Rams Cut Bradford?

he is at a special risk for another though. it’s a fact. a second tear has a worse prognosis. from every single piece of evidence i’ve read. that is the case.

zn wrote:

Really, this gets down to different ways we all view it. No one lacks the info. We just regard it in different ways. To me, if Bradford can come back from the 2nd ACL (which remains to be seen), I don’t regard him as a special risk for another, different injury the way I do Amendola.

In six years Bradford has had five major injuries (2 in 2009).
These injuries were to three different places (shoulder, ankle, and knee)
For two of these, shoulder and knee, he had reinjuries.

I don’t care if he is at special risk for a different injury. I am concerned that he is at much greater risk than normal for an injury. It doesn’t make any difference if it is a different injury or not. If he were to return in 2015 and start the season as starting qb I would not have a great deal of faith that he could complete the season.

TackleDummy wrote:

In six years Bradford has had five major injuries (2 in 2009).
These injuries were to three different places (shoulder, ankle, and knee)
For two of these, shoulder and knee, he had reinjuries.

I don’t care if he is at special risk for a different injury. I am concerned that he is at much greater risk than normal for an injury. It doesn’t make any difference if it is a different injury or not. If he were to return in 2015 and start the season as starting qb I would not have a great deal of faith that he could complete the season.

TD, this reasoning is, in my view, irrefutable.

And the whole matter of the re-injury factor pushes him way out into the future. They apparently took a major risk playing him before at least 18 months. Now … how long before his knee can actually be trusted? Probably well beyond the limit of his contract.

One may want to give him another chance. OK.

But the track records you cite drastically reduces the price any sane FO would be willing to gamble. A salary cap is a precious and limited (hence the word “cap”) resource. One absolutely cannot risk more than a couple million on a guy with this injury history.

Bradford’s value fell off a cliff the other night.

Personally, I doubt his career will ever recover.

TackleDummy wrote:

rfl wrote:
They apparently took a major risk playing him before at least 18 months.

I am not at all sure about the 18 months. I think that recent rehab techniques have cut that down greatly. There have been a large number of examples beginning with Adrian Peterson who have come back and done well after an ACL injury very quickly. I do not fault the Rams organization for that.

And it is possible that Bradford could rehab his knee again (he will have two months longer to do it) and play for the next five season without missing a down. But will it be with the Rams? We shall see. One thing will be is that the Rams will have until at least January of February to decide what they want to do. His rehab should be well under way by then. They likely will not want to start OTAs with him unless they are confident in him.

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

There’s a whole ongoing thread about the rehab time fwiw:

http://theramshuddle.com/topic/what-is-the-timeframe-on-acl-recoveries/

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

zn wrote:
Really, this gets down to different ways we all view it. No one lacks the info. We just regard it in different ways. To me, if Bradford can come back from the 2nd ACL (which remains to be seen), I don’t regard him as a special risk for another, different injury the way I do Amendola.

TD wrote:
In six years Bradford has had five major injuries (2 in 2009).
These injuries were to three different places (shoulder, ankle, and knee)

For two of these, shoulder and knee, he had reinjuries. The shoulder, first time he came back without surgery. The 2nd re-injure required surgery.

Same general sort of thing with the knee. The knee would not have been under the same kind of stress, I am assuming, if not for the previous injury.

And I really have a hard time counting 2011, when every Rams qb got injured. That year was a major debacle, with an OL that was first dysfunctioning and then injured into a mockery of itself.

So I just don’t see Bradford in the same light I see Amendola (which is what started this sub-thread).

I say that for 2 reasons and it covers 2 things.

First, I see Amendola’s body and the way he plays as not suited to football. I don’t see Bradford that way. I see him right now as basically being hit by a freak thing. I don’t see him as playing, with me thinking “what next.” (And I DID think that with Bradford. Bulger was a walking emergency room.) BUT at the same time, I keep also saying, should they bring him back (and I think they will), he will be on a longer time frame, he probably won’t be the starter (not right away), and they will have to determine how he responds. They have to see if he can play. So I am not discounting a 2nd knee surgery or its possible effects…I just don’t write him off. I really DON’T see it as an Amendola situation where you just move on.

The other thing is that you can afford to walk away from an Amendola. Do you walk away from a qb of this caliber?

So I don’t see the logic of “it’s time to walk away”–what’s more, I aint clairvoyant or nothin but I don’t think the TEAM thinks that either.

And it’s early…but, so far, at this point, the team is not talking like they have to move on. Fisher called the injury a freak thing. They all talk about him being part of the team, and helping with game plans, and so on.

It would be so cold–AND unnecessary–to make him a part of the team, make him part of gameplanning with Hill and a resource for Hill, and then at the end just cut him loose. I can’t imagine any conditions under which that would be possible.

PLUS as I said he is worth the risk, provided of course they also add a qb or 2 and DON’T act as if he is the week 1 starter. If you listen to the team talk about him, they thought he was prepared to take off. So here is a guy with a laser arm, good accuracy, a fine deep ball, who knows the offense, who has everyone’s respect, who knows the receivers, and is basically a 6 year vet in 2015, and they just walk away from that when there is no risk in keeping him to see if he can play?

Herzog wrote:

You’re right, he’s not Amendola….Sam’s injuries are usually of the season ending variety. And because of the position he plays, they are season WIPING injuries. It is because of the high investment in him that makes it cost more when he’s injured.

I would say that we have reached the point of irreconcilable differences.

An impasse.

The unbridgeable gulf.

The point where one guy sees things one way and another sees it another way.

I say “tohm-ah-toh,” and you say “toledo.”

Or to quote Raising Arizon again–“there’s what’s right, and there’s what’s right, and never the twain shall meet”.

..

The main problem for me is that Bradford injures himself! The first ACL tear was of his own action, the dude is awkward. The re-tear,well I’ve seen
more contact at a T-Ball game there is no way he was ready for a 16 game season. A best case scenario is a full year and no way Bradford is a best case candidate the re-tear proves that conclusively.

Just cause these fit the topic fwiw

==

SI.com’s Boomer Esiason says how there’s still good football left in Sam Bradford’s NFL career.

http://cinesport.stltoday.com/saint-louis-sports/si-dont-count-out-bradford-rams/

==

On today’s Upon Further Review, the Post-Dispatch’s Bryan Burwell sympathizes with Sam Bradford’s unfortunate injury yet stills believes the Rams can compete with Shaun Hill moving under center.

http://cinesport.stltoday.com/saint-louis-post-dispatch-upon-further-review/ufr-rams-season-not-doomed/

.

Herzog wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>zn wrote:</div>

Herzog wrote:
You’re right, he’s not Amendola….Sam’s injuries are usually of the season ending variety. And because of the position he plays, they are season WIPING injuries. It is because of the high investment in him that makes it cost more when he’s injured.

I would say that we have reached the point of irreconcilable differences.

An impasse.

The unbridgeable gulf.

The point where one guy sees things one way and another sees it another way.

I say “tohm-ah-toh,” and you say “toledo.”

Or to quote Raising Arizon again–“there’s what’s right, and there’s what’s right, and never the twain shall meet”.

..

LOL….fair enough

One more note. My fear is that so long the Rams keep Sam, they won’t make a hard move to get his replacement. Fisher doesn’t like to send mixed messages and he’s all about “Sam’s our guy”. AND he doesn’t want to undermine Sam. These issues vex me Zack…I am vexed.

These would be different circumstances, and eveyone would know it. I also always trust competent guys to figure things out. So let’s say they draft a guy, and he’s good, and Bradford comes through too. Trade one. Shrug.

Herzog wrote:

Yeah maybe….perhaps I should put more faith in the ‘Stache’. They were wise to bring Hill in….for this very reason.

Life is a bash
When you trust the stache
There’s no fear indeed
If you believe in the Snead