Skip to content

Bradford’s contract could make it hard to trade him

Arizona Cardinals v St. Louis Rams Getty Images

Every new G.M. wants to hire his own coach, and every new coach wants to find his own quarterback.  And so, with both G.M. Billy Devaney and coach Steve Spagnuolo in danger of being fired by the Rams after Sunday’s season finale against the 49ers, there’s no guarantee that their replacements will want to keep Bradford.

Three years ago, for example, Josh McDaniels decided he didn’t want Jay Cutler to be the quarterback of the Broncos.  And so, after several weeks of ugliness, Cutler was traded to Chicago.  It’s unlikely that McDaniels interviewed for the job wearing on his sleeve open disdain for Cutler’s game — and it’s unlikely that the candidate for the Rams’ job will say anything other than that which owner Stan Kroenke wants to hear when it comes to his team’s franchise quarterback.

But the secret wishes of the next head coach may not matter.  As to Bradford, the franchise and the quarterback are tied together financially.  Since Bradford was the last No. 1 pick of the rookie windfall contract era, moving Bradford to another team won’t be easy.

Per a source with knowledge of Bradford’s contract, the team already has paid him $30 million in only two seasons.  He has $12 million guaranteed due in 2012, and he’s scheduled to earn another $9 million guaranteed in 2013.

And so, to trade Bradford, the Rams would need to find a team willing to cough up $21 million guaranteed over two years, which is only one million less than the total money Cam Newton received on a four-year contract as the top pick in 2011.  Likewise, Bradford’s new team would have to be willing to give up multiple picks and/or players, with the package sent from Oakland to Cincinnati for Carson Palmer being the potential benchmark.

With Bradford’s buzz greatly diminished, it would be hard to persuade any team to give up anything of significant value for his services.  Even then, the Rams would be watching $30 million walk away.

It would make far more sense then, now that the Rams have “earned” the No. 2 pick and the ability to pick Robert Griffin III (or Andrew Luck if Griffin leapfrogs Luck), to trade the selection for multiple picks and/or players, which could then be used to get more help around Bradford as the reconstituted Rams move forward.

Permalink 32 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Indianapolis Colts, Rumor Mill, St. Louis Rams
32 Responses to “Bradford’s contract could make it hard to trade him”
  1. 1captain1 says: Jan 1, 2012 9:44 AM

    The St Louis Rams have followed the syllabus to the letter for “How to Ruin A Young QB 101″

    If Bradford stays then he’ll have a 3rd OC in 3 years and the class will be complete.

    This is a complete failure by ownership and management.

  2. blackqbwhiterb says: Jan 1, 2012 9:46 AM

    “Bradford’s contract could make it hard to trade him”….Bradford’s injuries and performance are what makes it hard to trade him…..

  3. swampymux12 says: Jan 1, 2012 9:48 AM

    It’s hard to decide who’s star has fallen further this season; Sam Bradford or Josh Freeman. Everybody was so high on both these guys coming in and they have both played pretty terribly this year. That being said, it would be quite surprising to see the Rams try to move Bradford just 1 season after his rookie of the year campaign.

  4. bigjdve says: Jan 1, 2012 9:53 AM

    I don’t see why they would want to trade him, he was hurt this year and had 5th string receivers to throw to.

    I still think that there is a lot of upside to this guy, I remember when he played Washington that he was hitting receivers in the hands and they were dropping them.

  5. imissnumber21 says: Jan 1, 2012 9:57 AM

    Give him a chance.he was great last year but injuries and a piss poor team around him has made him falter.get the picks and build a team.

  6. onereasonableman says: Jan 1, 2012 10:03 AM

    I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Browns make a grab for him. If the Rams have a top pick this year, it might make it easier to move Bradford.

    Shurmer worked with Bradford already so that is a good fit. If Bradford’s stock as fallen, it might not take the Palmer deal to get it done.

    I would rather the Browns get playmakers and give Colt one more year.

  7. facelessman75 says: Jan 1, 2012 10:15 AM

    Dear saint Louis- we will take Bradford

    Signed Redskins

  8. 0sakpo says: Jan 1, 2012 10:19 AM

    Redskins will take him… You know our owner love to spend that kind of money >.< he's 1 of the qb that may improve to get in those elite rank… yeah wit helps…. n skills….

  9. waltdawg says: Jan 1, 2012 10:27 AM

    Dear Rams,

    OK…If you want to play hardball…we will trade Rex G and John B. We have staked our reputation on these guys, but we will give Sam a shot.

    Kyle and Mike

  10. pftstory says: Jan 1, 2012 10:32 AM

    “Every new G.M. wants to hire his own coach, and every new coach wants to find his own quarterback. ”

    This is simply not true.

    Dungy kept Manning when he took over.
    Caldwell kept Manning when he took over.
    Its a weaker example but did Switzer change QB’s for the Cowboys?
    Tomlin has been with the Steelers for 5 years. Ben has been there 8.

    There is a new GM and coach because the team is no good. That is why they want a new QB, odds are the guy there can’t do the job. 3 coaches above has won a Super Bowl. McDaniel’s did not.

    New Coaches of bad teams want their own QB. But in reality they just want to upgrade the position. MCDaniel’s might be an example of what bad coaches do.

    Show me the new coaches, (yes plural to support your claim) that dumped a quality QB just to bring in their own guy.

  11. docredskin says: Jan 1, 2012 10:39 AM

    Cleveland has two first round picks, one of which could swapped for Bradford. The Rams can get Luck, possibly a receiver, and move on. Bradford can then die a little inside knowing he has to live in Cleveland.

  12. fground says: Jan 1, 2012 10:58 AM

    I think RG3 will end in the mix for the number 1 pick.

  13. droopyyydog1 says: Jan 1, 2012 11:04 AM

    Dolphins have the cap room and could work a deal that would be cheaper than moving up to get Luck or RG3, that would be my new years resolution. Unfortunately PFTSTORY has it right, this continued push to have GM”s and Coaches clean house every time they take over is the biggest myth going. If anything the McDaniels situation proved that cleaning house isn’t the smart thing to do.

  14. gdeli says: Jan 1, 2012 11:25 AM

    right place at the right time. or right time, ha. lucky too.

  15. ripcityhawkhead says: Jan 1, 2012 11:28 AM

    The rams problem is they have whiffed on their o-line picks, their franchise tackles taken early are a joke and will probably both be replaced. Jason Smith was a #2 pick and Saffold #33. The last 5 drafts or so have really been a joke outside of Bradford and Chris Long. The GM should be the first one to lose his job not Bradford.

  16. ppc50 says: Jan 1, 2012 11:44 AM

    There is no way that Bradford should be traded. The Rams have invested a lot of money into this guy and who will replace him in the FA market? Unless they draft Luck or Griffin III, starting a rookie is normally not a good idea (ie.David Carr). Even if they drafted Luck, they need help around him. Brandon Lloyd is good, but as a #2, maybe #3 and Stephen Jackson is really the only offensive weapon they have. I think they should keep Bradford and give him a better supporting cast. TO is a better receiver than what they have now (he is good, not great anymore).

  17. cowboysp says: Jan 1, 2012 11:49 AM

    If the Rams get the #1 overall pick, they need to trade the pick, not draft Andrew Luck, keep Bradford, and keep HC Spagnuolo and GM Devaney too.

    Sincerely,
    Signed, all Seahawks and Niners fans…..

  18. test2402 says: Jan 1, 2012 12:27 PM

    Tim Tebow would be accepted by anyone.

  19. jbcommonsense says: Jan 1, 2012 12:49 PM

    I’d be thrilled to see my Redskins trade for Bradford, but this whole ”multiple picks” talk is for the birds. The best they will be offered is one draft pick from the 2nd round or even 3rd round.

    Nobody will sell their team’s future away for an expensive QB with a mediocre record.

  20. howmanyringsyourteamgot says: Jan 1, 2012 1:29 PM

    Bradford put up pedestrian numbers in a dink and dunk offense his rookie year far from what could be called “great”. They went 7-9 last year due to their defense being healthy not an overrated injury prone QB. Bradford = David Carr 2.0

  21. ron69 says: Jan 1, 2012 2:15 PM

    Bradford doesn’t have much value really a 3rd or maybe a 2nd could be right for a injury prone Qb who hasn’t done much. having said that if they end with the first pick Luck its’s a no brainer

  22. garryfish says: Jan 1, 2012 7:01 PM

    Bradford for Sanchez. Change on scenery for both QBs.

  23. jrspike says: Jan 1, 2012 7:01 PM

    Dump him for two 7 round picks

  24. papacrick says: Jan 1, 2012 7:05 PM

    So glad Bradford stayed in school another year to avoid Detroit. It would have been fitting for the Lions if they got him instead of Stafford.

  25. nflfollower says: Jan 1, 2012 7:11 PM

    It’s simple, they have NO CHANCE of trading him. So build around him. I still think he has all the physical tools to be good in this league. As a lions fan I don’t follow the rams closely but seems like maybe they should keep spags and give it another year with this system, rather than start from scratch. We started from scratch, and it took 3 years to get the 6th seed. So I say give your system another year.

  26. emperorzero says: Jan 1, 2012 7:19 PM

    So Bradford who has started 20+ games in the NFL couldn’t draw much more than a third rounder, but a guy like Kolb who was a back up with a handful of decent games under his belt was worth a 2 and Cromartie? Jesus, you guys are worse GM’s than Deveany.

  27. goldrush36 says: Jan 1, 2012 7:46 PM

    You know it’s a real shame that the Rams didn’t pay attention to their divisional counterparts in this disaster. The 49ers wrote the recipe the Rams are cooking with. It only took 7 years to reclaim the wreckage…. Same can be said for Seattle to an extent. They had success and then let the team go so Hasselbeck suffered the consequences.

  28. gnou90 says: Jan 1, 2012 8:06 PM

    Really? Really? Sam Bradford has suddenly become awful? How about this:

    1. 8 Starters on IR; including both tackles, starting TE and starting WR. Yes, I know, I know, Green Bay lost starters left and right last year and won the Super Bowl; however, Green Bay did not lose them in the key areas, OL and WR and offense is about continuity.
    2. Drafting for defense; the reason for David Carr’s failure because Dom Capers (HC) and Charlie Casserly(GM) always drafted for defense (save Andre Johnson) and decided to stock offense w/off the street FAs.

    The Rams will set themselves back 3-5 years if they decide this or is this Stan Kronke’s master plan to go back to LA?

  29. bmh78190 says: Jan 1, 2012 8:39 PM

    Offensive Line! and Bradford would be protected and SJ39 would be blowing up defenses. Brandon Lloyd and Danario Alexander did not look awful this year. Danny Amendola gets healthy as a great slot receiver and possible return man. They have the cards, they just need to build a house.

  30. revroy78 says: Jan 1, 2012 11:15 PM

    McDaniel is the anti-Midas. Everything he touches turns to crap. We should have realized that when he favored Cassel over Cutler.

  31. truthserum4u says: Jan 2, 2012 4:11 AM

    I think the Rams pick Kalil with the second pick. He’s considered a franchise LT and future Pro Bowler (whatever that’s worth). By most accounts he’s the rated the second best player in the draft. Then they can move Saffold to RT and Smith to G, thus strengthening three positions on the line and giving Bradford a chance.

  32. gmen1987 says: Jan 2, 2012 10:00 AM

    As I’ve been saying, the Rams are stuck with Bradford whether they like it or not.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!