Rams, please make the right pick

As we inch closer to the NFL draft in April, I begin to wonder if my family and myself are the only sane ones. Or perhaps we're the crazy ones. With a few exceptions, it seems that there are lots of people being suckered into the idea that the St. Louis Rams drafting Sam Bradford is a good thing. I could not disagree more. I have nothing wrong with Bradford as a person or even as a quarterback. He has a pretty good arm and is an accurate quarterback. He seems like a decent person. Yet, being a Kansas alumni and fan, I have seen his play at Oklahoma. He is a predominantly shotgun quarterback. He has become injury prone despite playing behind one of the better offensive lines in the Big 12 conference. And I have yet to hear a really good, convincing argument for making him the number one pick. The weak arguments that have been made are that the Rams passed up on QB's the last couple years, so we can't pass on Bradford. He's the top QB of this class. And of all things, one person even suggested that it's better to draft Bradford because QB's sell more jerseys than a defensive tackle would.

This is about wins and loses. Bradford will not be the difference between the Rams going 1-15 again or not. I have not heard any rumors of drafting or picking up any free agent receivers. Who exactly is he going to throw to that will make him look any better than Marc Bulger? (Who honestly could have been a great QB if we had kept some offensive weapons and given him good protection.) How does it make sense to draft a QB only based on the fact he's the best QB in a weak class and because the team passed on QB's the last couple years? That was under different management, who may have made a mistake. This new management group needs to start over by not making iffy picks. And on the shotgun issue, Bradford is going to spend a lot of time getting used to being under center. Yes, he wasn't a pure shotgun quarterback but he was in that formation a good 80% of his plays I'd wager.

He just isn't worth the number one pick. Several analysts have said as much, but still fall back on the fact that the Rams need a quarterback. There are several players that the team could pick up via free agency. The Rams could even pick up a solid QB in the second round and groom him. I've also heard that Bradford might be picked because he would come cheaper than Ndamukong Suh. How does this make sense? Any agent worth their salt will make sure their guy gets first pick money, whether he was projected to get picked that high or not.

In my opinion, Suh is a sure pick. He's one of the most dominant defensive players that has come along in decades. He can anchor your defense for the next 10-12 years. Bradford is a questionable pick who has just as much of a chance, if not more, to be a bust as he does to become a franchise quarterback. This is honestly the most worried and irritated I have ever been about pre-draft talk. I am usually the kind of person that would like certain people picked but trusts that the people who really scout this know what they are doing. Yet everything I read about the St. Louis Rams potential picks points to a waste of a draft. The positions that I see this team needing the most are defense, receivers and possibly a solid backup for Steven Jackson. Yet what do I see projected for the Rams first two picks? A quarterback and a tight end. The Rams just picked up another tight end via free agency for goodness sake. And that's to go along with the plethora of TE's they've drafted recently. Manumaleuna, Byrd, Klopfenstein to name a few.

Then another thing that angers me is the Bernie Miklasz article about this very subject. He made the point that the team is in limbo with the current ownership, the Rosenblooms, looking to get out and the potential buyer not being able to be confirmed until after the draft. If I was Mr. Shahid Kahn, I would be telling the management how I felt in regards to this draft and suggest that if the team looks to go cheap that I might pull my offer off the table. I apologize to anyone who reads this who feels the other way. I don't usually see things so one sided or go off like a fan calling into a sportstalk show, but this is just one of those issues that I can't see the opposing view. It makes so much sense to take Suh. People always say, take the best player not always the need. Suh is head and shoulders the best player.

Ok...breathe. In...out...in...out. Alrighty, time for my usual random thoughts.

- This weekend is going to be a big one for the St. Louis Bandits. The team is four points back of division leading Topeka. I am really geared up for this game. Almost to the point that it seems odd since I'm not the one playing.

- Am I the only one getting antsy with this little layoff the Blues have? I know they'll have a couple games in hand, but I just don't like the fact that other teams are able to add to their point totals and the Blues are idle in their playoff push.

- Why is it that people who like hockey and soccer can't find a prominent place within the media? ESPN's Steve Levy and John Buccigross on the hockey side and perhaps Bob Ley for soccer are the only ones that come to mind. I grow tired of these other fools trying to talk about these sports when they know nothing about them. I love the show Pardon the Interruption, but I find it ridiculous when they talk about boxing and horse racing like they still matter (simply because THEY like those), but make fun of actual sports like hockey and soccer.

- Lastly, can I please, please, please get hired to broadcast full time? People who know me know that I am self deprecating, perhaps to a fault, and not overly boastful unless in a joking manner. Yet I keep hearing play-by-play men who I know that I am or can be better than. And these people are working at high levels. I just don't get it.

Anyway, sorry this blog turned into more of a rant than I usually do. Until next time, just remember that it's only my opinion...but I'm right.