Go get Bradford

[Larz]

this place is so serious, lol

[jett]

52 minutes ago, Savage69 said:

Bradford has a career 23-37 record and has 1 16 game season when he had 21 tds and 12 picks. Sanchez has a 37-35 record and a season best of 26 tds and 18 picks..Sanchez has 13 rushing tds to just 2 for Bradford.. So Bradford is vastly superior?? 

Rams were garbage, Jets were almost super bowl contenders, twice. And that was in spite of Sanchez. 21 and 12 is better than 26 want 18. I mean 18 interceptions? There's no defending that. Sanchez was awful. Geno might just be worse, but Bradford for all his faults, is better than Sanchez. Ok maybe not vastly but he still is better. 

[nyjunc]

23 minutes ago, jett said:

Rams were garbage, Jets were almost super bowl contenders, twice. And that was in spite of Sanchez. 21 and 12 is better than 26 want 18. I mean 18 interceptions? There's no defending that. Sanchez was awful. Geno might just be worse, but Bradford for all his faults, is better than Sanchez. Ok maybe not vastly but he still is better. 

actually 32 total TDs in 2011.  The Jets won nothing "in spite" of Mark, he was vital to both runs.  Mark is w/o a doubt better than Bradford.  it's been proven a team can win w/ Mark, that has yet to be proven w/ Bradford.

[HessStation]

Boy did I 180 on Bradford. Thought he was the bees knees when he was on the Rams. F the toad.

[jett]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

actually 32 total TDs in 2011.  The Jets won nothing "in spite" of Mark, he was vital to both runs.  Mark is w/o a doubt better than Bradford.  it's been proven a team can win w/ Mark, that has yet to be proven w/ Bradford.

This Sanchez sounds great. Let's bring him in he's clearly the answer. 

[Villain The Foe]

5 hours ago, jett said:

Oh and obviously.. 

Bradford > Geno, Hoyer, Fitz and MOST IMPORTANTLY GLENNON 

Dont try to salvage your failed thread by throwing dirt on everyone else but the dude this failed thread is about. 

[Villain The Foe]

4 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Jets refuse to pay their incumbent starter 8 mill a year, thus trade for a guy who is not much better making double that amount.....makes sense!

I'd rather have Ryan Fitzpatrick than Sam Bradford. 

 

Now thats saying something. 

[Villain The Foe]

5 hours ago, rillo said:

Why? Maybe the eagles want tunsil or Elliot. Having Mr glass back there with a questionable O-line is disastrous

I doubt it. They could have stayed at 8 and picked up Ronnie Stanley. 

[shawn306]

This board get dumber by the second

[Greenseed4]

I proposed this in a different thread. 

Pederson signed Chase Daniel to a megadeal because Chase has 3 or 4 years running his KC offense. Signing Bradford to his contract is the real head scratcher, especially in light of this CLE trade.  But looking back on the original trade which landed Fragile Sam, the Rams sent Bradford and a 5th round pick to the Eagles, who parted with Foles a 4th, and a future 2nd (2016). 

The current contract includes $11M of gauranteed bonus money, already paid, already on their books for the year. And THIS is what makes any trade for Bradford difficult. To trade FOR him would require adequate draft picks which is something they now desperately need having made this trade to #2.  (If the Jets offered a 2016 4th and conditional 2017 2nd, the deal could probably get done).  AND they may need to part with a player that has gauranteed money already paid on OUR books....like David Harris.  Considering they just traded away Kiko Alonso, this might not be that far-fetched. Though, in adding a player, I would come off that future second and maybe bump that down a round or two. 

You guys say what you will, but Bradford for $7M, at his age, with his accuracy, and deep ball, in this offense. Is better than Fitzy. 

[Il Mostro]

6 hours ago, Jetlag said:

I'd be more interested in Chase Daniel and his contract than Bradford.

So would the Iggles.

[jett]

3 hours ago, Villain The Foe said:

Dont try to salvage your failed thread by throwing dirt on everyone else but the dude this failed thread is about. 

LOL u should have been swallowed to

[jgb]

I wouldn't be opposed to Bradford. But he will cost much more than Fitz.

[j4jets]

12 hours ago, jett said:

Do it tanny. 

 

He turned it on down the stretch last year, he's better than Fitz so all the Fitz haters should love this. 

*pukes

[Sperm Edwards]

18 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Jets refuse to pay their incumbent starter 8 mill a year, thus trade for a guy who is not much better making double that amount.....makes sense!

1. They offered him more than $8M/year. My guess is minimum $9M, since that was also the alleged base # the Jets would be willing to go to when their offer was rumored to be lower. But even if it was "similar to Chase Daniel's" contract with Philadelphia, it would equate to $15M since that's what Daniel gets if he's the starter. Fitz said no. Because there are a bunch of teams breaking his door down lol.

2. Bradford would not make double, unless the Jets miraculously write a check to Philadelphia for the $11M signing bonus they paid Bradford in March, plus a little more on top of that. Bradford would make less for the Jets than Fitzpatrick is seeking: $7M in 2016 and $17M in 2017. Total if kept 2 years is $24M ($12M/yr avg). Hardly double.

3. The other thing you're "buying" with Bradford is youth + perceived upside, which is greater than Fitzpatrick's. Eye of the beholder, I guess, but it's the reason he gets a lot more.

4. This idea [trading for Bradford] is still stupid. What draft pick would be required to get him -- our 2nd? What about next year when his $ goes up to $17M (or pay him $4M for the privilege of cutting IF he's somehow uninjured at the time)? I don't like Bradford as a long term solution, and it's mindless to fork over a 2nd-3rd round draft pick for the privilege of paying an always-injured stopgap that much $ on a 2 year deal. 

5. Philadelphia has announced they're keeping their trio of QBs anyway, so they don't have to put Wentz on the field this season. At least that's what they're saying now.

[Smashmouth]

no

[jack48]

16 hours ago, jett said:

Do it tanny. 

 

He turned it on down the stretch last year, he's better than Fitz so all the Fitz haters should love this. 

Have we forgotten that he is made out of potato chips?

[BowlesMovement]

Hmmm, interesting idea.  Let me think about that for a while and get back to you.....

 

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Villain The Foe]

7 hours ago, jett said:

LOL u should have been swallowed to

Or just aborted. Too bad my mom/dad were actually parents! 

 

Now look at what the world has to deal with.  

[FTL Jet Fan]

Pleae no

[drdetroit]

This idea is like gay

[Smashmouth]

1 hour ago, BowlesMovement said:

Hmmm, interesting idea.  Let me think about that for a while and get back to you.....

 

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOO

really we've had enough deer in the headlights QB's around here don't need another one.

[nyjunc]

14 hours ago, jett said:

This Sanchez sounds great. Let's bring him in he's clearly the answer. 

nah, we got a franchise record holder that can't get us to the playoffs w/ a weak sched and loaded team.  we are set.

[hawk]

19 hours ago, JiF said:

They wont sign Fitz for that money but they'll go trade for Bradford and hand him that contract???

WTF???

 

If I remember correctly, 2016 is rather small base salary, and could walk away in 2017.  Might not be a bad option, not saying a good one, but better than paying Fitz Big money or starting Geno.  JMO.

[Rangers9]

Mark isn't on Bradford's level and Bradford isn't elite. It's no contest comparing the two of them. And rarified stats meant to make Mark look good are just misleading. 

[JustInFudge]

9 minutes ago, hawk said:

If I remember correctly, 2016 is rather small base salary, and could walk away in 2017.  Might not be a bad option, not saying a good one, but better than paying Fitz Big money or starting Geno.  JMO.

I think the base is 7mil this year because of all the guaranteed money but with the signing bonus their cap hit was like 12.5mil. Next year his base is 13mil. 

[Sperm Edwards]

6 minutes ago, JiF said:

I think the base is 7mil this year because of all the guaranteed money but with the signing bonus their cap hit was like 12.5mil. Next year his base is 13mil. 

He also gets a $4M roster bonus next year.  Whether it's the roster bonus (likely) or salary, $4M of next year's $17M is fully guaranteed. That balloons to $8M guaranteed if he gets injured. But hey, what are the odds that Sam Bradford gets injured, right?

[ChuckkieB]

I would stay far away from Bradford.  Other than the injury concern, he just not that good.  If he's traded to another team this year, that would be his third team in six years which means two teams had him and gave up on him being "their guy."  Not very inspiring to be the third team to take a chance on him.  Pass.

[Rangers9]

The advantage to Fitz over Bradford is that he knows the system, has proven he can run it  successfully (at least I think so) and has a rapport with his teammates and a years experience with his two main receivers who want him to return. So my preference would be Fitz. But overall Bradford is a better Qb and he adapted to Philly pretty quickly. last year. If affordable I wouldn't mind Bradford if we can't sign Geno but for smaller compensation.

[hawk]

11 minutes ago, JiF said:

I think the base is 7mil this year because of all the guaranteed money but with the signing bonus their cap hit was like 12.5mil. Next year his base is 13mil. 

Yes there cap hit is 12.5 Million, but only 7 would transfer to a trade partner.

4 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

He also gets a $4M roster bonus next year.  Whether it's the roster bonus (likely) or salary, $4M of next year's $17M is fully guaranteed. That balloons to $8M guaranteed if he gets injured. But hey, what are the odds that Sam Bradford gets injured, right?

According to spotrac, $4 Million of his salary becomes guaranteed, not sure what the conditions are for becoming guaranteed.  Most likely if he is on the roster in March, as well as the roster bonus.  I don't see the injury guarantee.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/philadelphia-eagles/sam-bradford/

[JustInFudge]

4 minutes ago, hawk said:

Yes there cap hit is 12.5 Million, but only 7 would transfer to a trade partner.

According to spotrac, $4 Million of his salary becomes guaranteed, not sure what the conditions are for becoming guaranteed.  Most likely if he is on the roster in March, as well as the roster bonus.  I don't see the injury guarantee.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/philadelphia-eagles/sam-bradford/

Hmmm...is there an opt out next season or would they be locked into that inflated salary?  That's the issue.  If they're unwilling to commit to Fitz like that, who's a FA, why would they give up draft capital or a player for Bradford?  

Doesnt make any sense. 

[hawk]

5 minutes ago, JiF said:

Hmmm...is there an opt out next season or would they be locked into that inflated salary?  That's the issue.  If they're unwilling to commit to Fitz like that, who's a FA, why would they give up draft capital or a player for Bradford?  

Doesnt make any sense. 

That is what it looks like to me (which doesn't mean anything in reality).  Certainly, draft pick compensation would be significant in what would make the trade have value.  

Edit:  I think it is all moot anyway because I doubt they gave him $11 Million up front just to trade him.

[Sperm Edwards]

18 minutes ago, hawk said:

Yes there cap hit is 12.5 Million, but only 7 would transfer to a trade partner.

According to spotrac, $4 Million of his salary becomes guaranteed, not sure what the conditions are for becoming guaranteed.  Most likely if he is on the roster in March, as well as the roster bonus.  I don't see the injury guarantee.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/philadelphia-eagles/sam-bradford/

The total amount of his contract that was "fully guaranteed" was $22M. By the end of 2016 he will have been paid $18M ($11M signing bonus and $7M salary). That leaves $4M leftover on the "fully guaranteed" amount.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/03/01/bradford-getting-healthy-signing-bonus-guarantees/

It's $26M in total guarantees, but only $22M is "fully" guaranteed. The other $4M is a guarantee for injury.

http://overthecap.com/player/sam-bradford/1349/

So he gets $4M next year no matter what. If he busts his ACL again, he gets $8M no matter what. If kept, he gets $13M salary and $4M roster bonus ($17M total).

That is how I understand it.

[Big Blocker]

I have to say there sure seems like a lot of misinformation on this site about Bradford, but before I get into his positives, let me acknowledge his problems in regard to a possible trade:

First of all I am skeptical that the Eagles really want to move him despite it being apparent that they will go Qb with their first round pick, getting either Goff or Wentz.  But if Bradford is on their squad he almost certainly is their better option to start than either Goff or Wentz.  And that would likely stay that way all season.  This consideration does not mean that the Eagles will absolutely not trade Bradford, but it does mean they will probably want something real of value in return.

Second is Bradford's history of injuries.  Including missing two games last year.

Third is his contract, while not nearly as bad as some here seem to think (he's already been paid most of his compensation for 2016), becomes more problematic next year, and that undercuts one of his positives, somewhat.

But let's look at his positives:

His level of play after he came back from injury.  This post will be too long as it is, but I invite all skeptics about Bradford to look at his stats down the stretch last year, including how he did in the Eagles' win over the Pats, and also their win over the Giants.  To me he looked like a Qb who came back and took some time to find his groove after missing a season and a half.  But did he find his groove?  Absolutely.  In that connection the FO in Philly clearly showed they thought their CS last year was a problem in the team's overall performance.  Their negative role probably also adversely affected Bradford.  In short, I see much good in how Bradford did over the course of last season.

Second I think it is an overstatement to assume Bradford will continue to have an above average risk of injury going forward.  I know nothing about his physical condition that suggests that his past injuries and surgeries will recur.  Note that he's had 4 injuries of significance, which is a lot, but two were to his left acl which showed no signs of bothering him last year, and the injury he did have last year, to his shoulder, was unrelated, can happen to anyone and he came back from it strong after missing only two games.

Third is I think he would be the best Qb available and a great fit for the Jets.  At 28 he's got the potential for years of service, and can be at a minimum that medium term option it looks increasingly like the Jets will need (since they can't rely on Petty and are unlikely to land a top prospect at Qb in his draft, and all reports are next year's Qb crop will be weak).

So, I think Bradford would be great on the Jets.  His contract could be worked out next year, and that would depend on his being the quality performer I think he would be. Otherwise they take another approach than just working through his current deal.

But... I don't think Philly will trade him.

[Ex-Rex]

20 hours ago, jett said:

Do it tanny. 

 

He turned it on down the stretch last year, he's better than Fitz so all the Fitz haters should love this. 

I hope Tanny does, because he is in Miami now, dolt.