Cardinals' QB Criteria

[Ronin]

Tom Pelissero‏Verified account@TomPelissero 1m1 minute ago
Asked Zimmer about the level concern medically with Sam Bradford. He referred to Bradford’s knee as degenerative but also said Bradford was skiing last week. Getting through a full season is the unknown.

 

[Gandhi]

I thought I would post it in this thread. The other day I heard a podcast where Ian Rapoport was a guest. He said that, while it was only him speculating, he would not be surprised if the Cardinals did make a play for Cousins based on the information he has gathered and the talk and whisper he has heard. Take it for what it’s worth.

 

[Jetstream Green]

It's a good problem to have, but I was more thinking of how this compares to someone like Josh McCown. McCown is pretty much guaranteed only one or two more years in the league. We would have a clear and present exit strategy from him.

If we signed Bradford and he lit it up ala Warner/Palmer, we could see a situation where the rookie just never gets the reps.

What I really think you meant was that we get one of these vets and for whatever reason they flourish in relation to their past stints but they are still not quite good enough to be the quarterback that can win it all. When we had Plummer, that was sort of the overriding theme, is his success a tease for really needing more at the position in consistency as was his case. You get a QB who holds you hostage to 'we are competitive' but not able to win the big one and the rookie who might have that special quality never gets a chance. I really liked Palmer but I can understand those who say he was able to only get you so far

 

[Solar7]

What I really think you meant was that we get one of these vets and for whatever reason they flourish in relation to their past stints but they are still not quite good enough to be the quarterback that can win it all. When we had Plummer, that was sort of the overriding theme, is his success a tease for really needing more at the position in consistency as was his case. You get a QB who holds you hostage to 'we are competitive' but not able to win the big one and the rookie who might have that special quality never gets a chance. I really liked Palmer but I can understand those who say he was able to only get you so far

Ehhh, close... I'm worried about us ending up in a situation where Bradford's at the end of his 2-3 year deal, has played really well, and we haven't gotten a good look at the rookie backup. Then we have to make a decision without all of the info to move forward.

 

[Cheesebeef]

It's a good problem to have, but I was more thinking of how this compares to someone like Josh McCown. McCown is pretty much guaranteed only one or two more years in the league. We would have a clear and present exit strategy from him.

If we signed Bradford and he lit it up ala Warner/Palmer, we could see a situation where the rookie just never gets the reps.

Considering that Bradford has...

a) never lit it up anywhere and

b) never stayed healthy for a year...

I’m confident we’ll have an exit strategy either way.

But with Josh, he’s cheaper, prob gets you similar production and comes with a cap number that allows the team to fill other badly needed holes.

 

[Solar7]

Considering that Bradford has...

a) never lit it up anywhere and

b) never stayed healthy for a year...

I’m confident we’ll have an exit strategy either way.

But with Josh, he’s cheaper, prob gets you similar production and comes with a cap number that allows the team to fill other badly needed holes.

His numbers in 2016 looked pretty great, and I feel like if he could just stay healthy, he could put it together... but my point isn't to stump for Bradford. It's the same as my feelings about Bridgewater or Taylor if they came to the team. I just think Bradford probably has the most potential to replicate the model we've had with Warner and Palmer in the recent past.

But yeah, your point about McCown is in line with my thinking.

 

[cardncubfan]

Considering that Bradford has...

a) never lit it up anywhere and

b) never stayed healthy for a year...

I’m confident we’ll have an exit strategy either way.

But with Josh, he’s cheaper, prob gets you similar production and comes with a cap number that allows the team to fill other badly needed holes.

A) is simply not true. He's lit it up with the Rams & Vikings. He was leading the league in passing with the Vikes & was completing over 70% of his passes. Staying healthy is a legit concern though. I would risk it though. Then sign a decent back up & draft a rook in rds 1 or 2.

 

[JeffGollin]

2012.

Great quote by Bill Polian - something like:

"If a guy has a history of being injured, chances are he will continue to get injured."

 

[THESMEL]

I would be very happy with Bradford - he is a risk worth taking.