No more incompletes for Bradford

[bluecoconuts]

Interesting. Can you expound on this? Are you saying Fisher and staff see things some of us don't? I see a ton to like about Bradford and his skill set, his moxie, and his desire. I want to see more of that transfer to on-field results and not feel-good stories gone south. Personally, I think he has the chance to be a top 5 type QB but hasn't achieved that due to a myriad of factors already discussed. At some point he needs to become THE story and not a byproduct of it and I think this year is that year to determine where most stand regarding him as a future Ram QB.

I'm pretty sure he's being sarcastic

 

[Thordaddy]

True that.

No one should be asking Sam to do it all, just give us a a Phil Simms performance.

You obviously weren't in Bush Stadium the day Simms spotted the Cardinals a 14-0 lead and came back to scorch them ,I couldn't believe my eyes how well he threw the ball.

 

[F. Mulder]

I'm pretty sure he's being sarcastic

Thanks. I can be kind of slow on the uptake at times!

 

[Ramatik]

Here's another interesting stat. Just for fun.

In the past 4 years, Rodgers has had five game winning drives and two 4th quarter comebacks.
In the past 4 years, Bradford has had four game winning drives and five 4th quarter comebacks.

In 6 fewer games, no less.

Now that's an interesting stat.

I'm hoping the Rams Team can have success with Bradford at QB. I just want him to continue to improve and grow with his receivers.

I think he's going to have a good year.

 

[max]

You obviously weren't in Bush Stadium the day Simms spotted the Cardinals a 14-0 lead and came back to scorch them ,I couldn't believe my eyes how well he threw the ball.

I'm a Rams fan. What's a Bush Stadium?

 

[Faceplant]

I doubt he could play "lights out" if he isn't winning. If he plays "lights out" against bad teams and in garbage time then I don't care.

If Bradford plays lights out and puts up ridiculous numbers and the team has another losing season, then I'll give you all my ROD money and eat my keyboard.

Infinitely more likely is if they have another losing season, then Bradford is either mediocre or worse or hurt again.

How would you explain the season Matthew Stafford just had?

 

[RamFan503]

Only one stat will matter after this year. Win - Loss.

That's always the only stat that matters for a TEAM.

That being said, IMO if Sam competes at a high level, that is all that he personally can do. If we start out playing defense like we did last year allowing 30+ points a game and roughly 150 yards rushing, plus have drops and shitty play calling, I can't really pin that on Sam and I think it would be ridiculous to get rid of any player that is playing well in spite of his surroundings. Now if Sam doesn't play well for WHATEVER reason, then I can see moving on and trying to do whatever it takes to improve the position.

I'm not married to the idea that Sam is our long term answer at QB though I do believe he is. I seem to remember a certain QB that threw the ball around a lot before coming here doing pretty well when the starter went down. I also recall a certain 6th round COMPENSATORY pick that played behind an established starter that came in and played pretty decent for a dozen or so years so far. Coincidence? OK - Probably but you never know.

 

[RamFan503]

Maybe I haven't drank enough yet to understand some of these concepts. But Sneed and Fisher didn't draft Bradford on their watch, they don't have that attachment. They haven't been bashful about replacing 98% of the roster they inherited, but Bradford is still here. They haven't forced him to restructure or benched him. They had multiple opportunities to replace him in the draft. But they haven't. Instead they have went all in on him. I know Fisher and Snead are professional experienced football men who have dedicated their lives to trying to the best in their craft. So how can they not see so clearly what the internet GM's and coaches know? Or they seeing the big picture of what Bradford brings to the table?

Wish I could give this one multiple likes. It's really at the core of what is happening here.

Interesting. Can you expound on this? Are you saying Fisher and staff see things some of us don't? I see a ton to like about Bradford and his skill set, his moxie, and his desire. I want to see more of that transfer to on-field results and not feel-good stories gone south. Personally, I think he has the chance to be a top 5 type QB but hasn't achieved that due to a myriad of factors already discussed. At some point he needs to become THE story and not a byproduct of it and I think this year is that year to determine where most stand regarding him as a future Ram QB.

In a word? Yes.

And I don't think Yama was pointing directly at you. Many of us internet GMs talk about things they see and it will NEVER be as much as Fisher et al see. Seems pretty obvious to me. We can watch all the rewind and coaches views we want and they would still see things NONE of us do. I'm not saying that they are infallible or that fans don't get it right sometimes when the coach doesn't, but to even think that we see as much as the coaches and staff see? Not so much.

 

[Yamahopper]

Interesting. Can you expound on this? Are you saying Fisher and staff see things some of us don't? I see a ton to like about Bradford and his skill set, his moxie, and his desire. I want to see more of that transfer to on-field results and not feel-good stories gone south. Personally, I think he has the chance to be a top 5 type QB but hasn't achieved that due to a myriad of factors already discussed. At some point he needs to become THE story and not a byproduct of it and I think this year is that year to determine where most stand regarding him as a future Ram QB.

I think i was clear. ..But let me add to it. The Rams could have had any Qb in the last draft, yet they chose a late round scrub instead of a possible heir to the throne. They could have had any Qb in the draft save one a couple years ago but they passed. Bradford could have been cut and cap room saved for more players. But he wasn't.
I'm starting to get the drift Bradford is here to stay

while no front office is perfect, it seems to me with the collective experience of the coaching staff, Sneads brains and Demoff's steady hand they seem to have a plan and or sticking to it.
We as fans can like it or not, but then we're not getting the big bucks for our expertise
For what the Rams game plan is they must feel he's the one to execute it or he would be gone.
The GSOT isn't coming back. This is a ball control team.
And when they feel Bradford isn't the guy he will be gone same as any other player.

 

[Zaphod]

What happens if the two do not necessarily go hand in hand this year? Lets say Bradford plays lights out and puts up ridiculous numbers and the team still doesnt win. What then?

Fans and media will still blame Sam.

And the organization will recognize his true value to the team regardless of the media.

 

[duckhunter]

Wish I could give this one multiple likes. It's really at the core of what is happening here.



In a word? Yes.

And I don't think Yama was pointing directly at you. Many of us internet GMs talk about things they see and it will NEVER be as much as Fisher et al see. Seems pretty obvious to me. We can watch all the rewind and coaches views we want and they would still see things NONE of us do. I'm not saying that they are infallible or that fans don't get it right sometimes when the coach doesn't, but to even think that we see as much as the coaches and staff see? Not so much.

Well then!! Is there some damn button on the coaches' TV set that blanks out the cheer leaders that us fans don't have? That's gotta be it.

Great discussion fellas.

 

[-X-]

Is the QB "W/L" stat the same thing as a Defense "W/L" stat?

 

[max]

How would you explain the season Matthew Stafford just had?

Stafford was erratic in 2013. Passer rating of 84.2 is a mediocre performance. A lot of people in Detriot were disappointed in him last year. When you've got Megatron you should be a lot better than that.

 

[-X-]

Stafford was erratic in 2013. Passer rating of 84.2 is a mediocre performance. A lot of people in Detriot were disappointed in him last year. When you've got Megatron you should be a lot better than that.

I'm trying to determine how you're establishing your baseline for Bradford's upcoming season. So it won't be acceptable if he passes for over 4600 yards, has a 7.3 YPA, a very low sack percentage and throws for 29 touchdowns + plays in all 16 games? He also has to be consistent? Can we get a definition for erratic while you're at it? Because the Lions Stafford had an average margin of defeat of 5.8 points in their his 9 losses. If their turnover ratio wasn't so bad (largely because of the sack/fumbles by Stafford himself), they very well could have had 10 wins.

I'm not ragging you with any of this. I seriously need to know what the baseline is for some of you guys. Someone else said if he lit it up, that would be fine. But now you're saying lighting it up isn't fine, because there has to be consistency.

 

[ED_29]

Thanks for this. I drink more than I should too (Lol). I didn't mean to imply he HAS been the cause of losses per se but am saying that at the very least a game manager doesn't "LOSE" games from mistakes. I am trying to differentiate the expectations of Sam as an elite-type QB vs. those who are lower. Frankly, I'd rather lose a game or two where Sam took a risk than to lose 4-5 because he played it safe. I want to see him DICTATE the action and not be passive and respond to it. I frankly think Spags and his 3 second whistle fucked Sam up big-time.

IMO he has rarely been the reason they have lost a game... but how often has he been the reason they "won"? That's really what people are talking about. I want Sam to be the reason the Rams win. Be the difference between them losing a game 16-13 and winning it 20-16. That's what I want to see more for sure. That's when we will know what he is. If he can't be that or if people can't get that then heck they should just have anyone be the QB because as a "team" it won't make any difference. That's what it sounds like some are saying to me.

 

[ED_29]

Thanks for this. I drink more than I should too (Lol). I didn't mean to imply he HAS been the cause of losses per se but am saying that at the very least a game manager doesn't "LOSE" games from mistakes. I am trying to differentiate the expectations of Sam as an elite-type QB vs. those who are lower. Frankly, I'd rather lose a game or two where Sam took a risk than to lose 4-5 because he played it safe. I want to see him DICTATE the action and not be passive and respond to it. I frankly think Spags and his 3 second whistle fucked Sam up big-time.

manipulate the defense and when defense are stacking the box to stop what promises to be a deadly run game destroy single coverage and make them pay

 

[mr.stlouis]

Give the man 3.5 seconds on a PA fake and he'll shred defenses. That's the recipe.

 

[Thordaddy]

I'm a Rams fan. What's a Bush Stadium?

It's where they played when they first moved there and where the Cardinals played until they departed,
BTW Phil Simms LPRating 72.4
Sam 79.3

 

[ED_29]

Fans and media will still blame Sam.

And the organization will recognize his true value to the team regardless of the media.

and why would they do that... if Sam lights it up and does his part why would we blame him? that doesn't make any sense too me

 

[-X-]

Give the man 3.5 seconds on a PA fake and he'll shred defenses. That's the recipe.

He doesn't even need the play-action. Or 3.5 seconds (3.3 is sufficient). Just needs a clean pocket.'

EDIT. Had a video example, but it lasted less than 3.3 seconds on YouTube.