Thursday-and-Long: Could Rams Take Bradford at No. 1?

A consensus is building around defensive tackles Gerald McCoy and Ndamukong Suh as the clear-cut top-two picks in this year's NFL draft, but Oklahoma QB Sam Bradford could yet crash the party. Sources say the Rams are determined to upgrade at quarterback this off-season, and that there's a chance they could use the No. 1 pick to do that -- especially if they can convince themselves that Bradford is fully healthy.

I spoke last week with several people (two agents and one team executive) familiar with the Rams' thinking, and they all said the Rams' top priority is quarterback. They plan to take a serious look at Bradford, who was No. 1 on some early draft boards before he injured his shoulder last season. And while it might make more sense to trade out of the No. 1 spot to a spot later in the top 10 and take Bradford there, the sources all pointed out that trading down is easier said than done, and they offered several reasons the Rams could use to justify taking the 2008 Heisman Trophy winner at No. 1 overall:

1. The Rams will soon have a new owner, and generally a new owner likes to make a big star-power splash. And as much attention as Suh has justifiably received in recent months, there's no star power like Heisman-winning-quarterback star power. It remains to be seen how strong a hand the Rams' new owner will take in football matters, but you have to assume he'll want some.

2. When you start talking about first-pick money these days, you could be talking about $40-plus million guaranteed, and it'd be easier to justify that kind of expense for a franchise quarterback than for a defensive tackle. Assuming, of course, that you're convinced Bradford is a franchise quarterback. The Lions saw enough from Matthew Stafford in his rookie year to think they hit the jackpot at No. 1 last year, but is Sam Bradford the same caliber of player? He's relatively small, played in a spread offense at Oklahoma and had his final college season blown up by a shoulder injury, so there are many questions to answer. But if the Rams can answer them to their satisfaction, they could talk themselves into Bradford as a No. 1 pick.

3. There's not much else out there on the market. As FanHouse's Chris Harry detailed in this free-agency primer on quarterbacks, it's not as if quarterback-needy teams are going to be able to go out and pluck what they need off the open market. They could take a chance on a Jason Campbell, if he becomes available. And one of my sources said the Rams are serious about looking into acquiring Michael Vick. But either would come with his share of questions marks. And as far as trading for somebody like Vick or the Eagles' Kevin Kolb, the Rams have so many other needs that it's hard to imagine them being able to give up what they'd need to give up in such a deal.

4. There are some in the Rams' hierarchy who wish they'd taken a chance on a quarterback last year when they had the No. 2 pick. One of the sources said there were some in the Rams' draft room pushing to take Mark Sanchez at No. 2. Given the way their pick, Jason Smith, flopped and Sanchez thrived after the Jets moved up to take him No. 5, those voices could carry more weight this year if they're pushing to take a quarterback at No. 1.

Bradford and the Rams still have many questions to answer before this becomes a legitimately feasible scenario. And in the end, the Rams could go the safe route, as they did last year, and pick one of the DTs. But with more than two months left before the draft, there's time for a lot of things to change. And if Bradford can answer the questions to the Rams' satisfaction, he could yet hear his name called first by Roger Goodell on draft night.

Labor Pains

For the record, and contrary to the way it's been portrayed almost everywhere, players' union head DeMaurice Smith wasn't handicapping last week when he answered "14" to a scale-of-1-to-10 question about the looming lockout. The question was, "On a scale of 1-to-10, how concerned are you about the possibility of a lockout?" And Smith gave the answer that has been quoted with marginal accuracy in many places since. The point of the question, and the answer, is that Smith and the union have to prepare their players for a possible lockout, since that's what will happen in 2011 if no new collective bargaining agreement is reached in time to prevent it. And in spite of an impromptu negotiating session that took place Saturday morning in Fort Lauderdale, there still has been no substantial progress toward a new deal.

A person familiar with the meeting said that Saturday's session was a little bit different from prior ones, mainly in terms of personal dynamics, since actual team owners were present instead of just commissioner Roger Goodell and his negotiators. But no progress was made on any substantial issues, and the union remains convinced that the owners won't feel motivated to do anything until the U.S. Supreme Court issues its ruling in the American Needle case. The union's theory is that an overly broad ruling in that case could give the NFL greatly increased freedom from antitrust restrictions and strengthen the owners' bargaining position, so why would they do anything until the Court rules one way or another? The union would still like to avoid an uncapped 2010 season, but the owners have made their peace with it and feel no motivation to do a deal before the March 5 deadline that would trigger the uncapped year.

The union did score a victory last week when it won its appeal of the league's decision to suspend its supplemental revenue sharing fund without the union's agreement. The league announced some months ago that it would suspend the fund, which totals about $200 million and would apply to payrolls of the bottom eight revenue teams for the 2011 season. The union, fearing that the decision was aimed at allowing owners to use that $200 million as part of their lockout fund (since teams won't need the payroll assistance if there are no games in 2011), appealed and cited a clause in the collective bargaining agreement that requires "any material modification" to the league's revenue-sharing program to be deemed satisfactory to the union. The league hasn't decided whether to appeal the special master's ruling, but assuming it stands, it could have some effect on the owners' willingness or ability to put a lockout plan in place.

Extra Points

Teams looking for QB help are bugging the Eagles, who could deal two of their three quarterbacks -- Donovan McNabb, Kevin Kolb and Michael Vick -- this off-season. But teams in need of running back help are likewise interested in seeing what the Cowboys are planning to do with their three-headed backfield monster of Marion Barber, Felix Jones and Tashard Choice. There have been rumblings about Dallas dealing Choice, but the Cowboys are more interested in moving Barber, who broke down a bit this year and could continue to lose carries as Jones continues to improve. The Cowboys are likely to enter 2010 as a popular Super Bowl favorite and could also keep all three backs ...

Freshly reinstated and released WR Donte' Stallworth, who apparently worked out for the Lions this week, is just one part of a fascinating off-season wide receiver market. With Arizona seemingly poised to deal Anquan Boldin and the Broncos likely to trade Brandon Marshall, WR-needy teams like Baltimore, Miami, Chicago, Detroit and the Jets could find themselves with some very interesting scenarios in advance of the draft ...

The under-the-radar coaching hire of the week was Tampa Bay's hiring of Alex Van Pelt as quarterback coach. In this capacity, Van Pelt will be the mentor to Josh Freeman, the raw-but-promising quarterback the Bucs took in the first round of last year's draft. Van Pelt was well thought of as a coaching prospect with the Bills -- remember, he was promoted to offensive coordinator there when Turk Schonert was fired just before the season started. But things obviously fell apart in Buffalo, and a fresh start in Tampa Bay, with a prospect like Freeman, could be beneficial to both men's careers.