Analyzing St. Louis Rams Alternatives To Sam Bradford

s

Nov 23, 2014; San Diego, CA, USA; St. Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford (8) before the game against the San Diego Chargers at Qualcomm Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Jake Roth-USA TODAY Sports

There are few figures in the NFL as divisive as St Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford. Even before his two consecutive season-ending injuries, there were many who felt the former Number One pick was not the long-term answer at the position. Inconsistent in his play, and surrounded by a poor supporting cast, Bradford failed to convince in a manner that would make Rams Nation forget about Kurt Warner, and never lived up to expectations. After having played only seven games in two seasons, the knives are very much out for the Oklahoma Sooner, with many calling on the franchise to cut ties with Number 8 and move in a different direction at quarterback.

Many of these detractors, however, have not been so forthcoming in offering possible solutions as to what this new direction might be. With the team seemingly on the cusp of emerging as a credible force in the League, decisions regarding the quarterback position would prove to be key. A healthy Bradford is, clearly, the best quarterback on the roster. Yes, we might have got excited with Austin Davis, but his inexperience and limited talents were exposed as defenses adjusted to him. Likewise, Shaun Hill has made a career out of being mostly a serviceable backup and, at 35, is evidently not a long-term answer. So, if the Rams were to move on from Bradford – something head coach Jeff Fisher has already ruled out – they should replace him with a better option.

Unfortunately, such an alternative does not seem to be readily apparent. Those available through free agency – the likes of Mark Sanchez, Jake Locker or Matt Moore – have struggled in other teams and do not seem like a clear upgrade – after all, they are free agents for a reason. Some commentators have also explored trades for players such as Nick Foles or Mike Glennon, overlooking that these are not surefire successes either. Besides, with no surplus of draft picks, or limited in good players available, the Rams could have little to offer. The roster depends on keeping these assets and could be severely set back by a gamble on another team’s quarterback. In terms of current players, the field is restricted.

There is, of course, the draft. There is a consensus among draft analysts that the only first-round quarterbacks in April’s draft are Jameis Winston and Marcus Mariota. Given the value given to quarterbacks in this process, these are unlikely to be available when the Rams draft at Number 10. Thus, to snare one of these prospects, the Rams would have to trade up. This would mean giving up valuable real-estate to take a punt on a player who is yet to take an NFL snap. From experience, Redskins fans would probably warn against mortgaging a franchise’s future on such a move and, with only five picks in the Draft, the Rams might have to wait until the later rounds to select a quarterback. This, however, would likely be more of a development project rather than an NFL-ready player and, therefore, would probably represent a step down from what is currently on the roster.

So, in the absence of other, more attractive options, it looks like the most prudent move might be to continue with Sam at the helm. This would require a compromise on his part, though, in the form of a restructured contract that would see the franchise have the cap room that would enable them to strengthen the offensive line – surely in Bradford’s interest. Sure, the Rams should draft a quarterback in the earlier rounds and commit to his development, while also signing a veteran to provide stability and depth. But, considering what is available, and as long as his knees hold up, it looks like Bradford will keep his job.

Got any other ideas?