No.

Not at all. When you look at a the draft selections of any team, the first thing you have to look at is the division they play in. Before you can dream of sniffing a playoff spot, you have to be able to beat the teams that you spend half of your schedule playing against. The Rams share the NFC West with the 49ers, Seahawks, and Cardinals. Two of those teams have next to nothing as far as running games go, and all of them have a weakness in the secondary. If the Rams added a great defensive lineman, sure he might disrupt 4, 5, maybe even 6 plays per game. 15 sacks over 16 games isn't going to equal 10 wins and a spot in the big dance. 30 touchdowns and 4,000 passing yards might not either, but it's going to get you a hell of a lot closer. Suh isn't going to be a difference maker on this team, and that's what the Rams need right now. My final answer again is no, what the Rams need is someone who will lead them to the promised land, and simply put a defensive lineman isn't going to do that.

Anyone who watched Suh play in 2009 wanted to draft him, whether they had a need for a defensive tackle or not. However, St. Louis was particularly lacking at the QB position, and no NFL team can expect to be competitive without a competent QB. Bradford was the most promising QB prospect available (meaning able to adjust to a pro-style system), so he was the right choice for the Rams.

Absolutely not. Drafting Sam Bradford was the correct move for the St Louis Rams. They don't really have a number one quarterback and if they are going to miss with the number, then they might as well do it by drafting for the most important position on the team. Ndamukong Suh had a great college career, but there is no guarantee he will be a star in the National Football League. He worked out as a good pick for the Detroit Lions, who the previous year drafted quarterback Mathew Stafford as number one overall; also the correct choice. No matter what player was picked number one, there is never a guarantee of their success. The Rams got what they needed, but like the Lions found out; drafting first overall is going to cost you big bucks for an unproven player. I do believe drafting history would indicate that a quarterback drafted #1 overall has usually been the better choice in the long run.