A Historical Survey Of Sam Bradford's Receiving Weapons

[rhinobean]

Like Sam asked, "how many olineman have I had". He knows where the real issues are!

 

[Ramifications]

Like Sam asked, "how many olineman have I had". He knows where the real issues are!

We don't really know everything he thinks and says, only a small fraction makes it to the sound byte stage. Again, hard to see how anybody could not conclude he was held back in his first three years by lack of continuity and talent at WR. Noting that isn't saying he didn't also have the same issues at OL. Observing one doesn't invalidate the other. They were both bad.

 

[-X-]

We don't really know everything he thinks and says, only a small fraction makes it to the sound byte stage. Again, hard to see how anybody could not conclude he was held back in his first three years by lack of continuity and talent at WR. Noting that isn't saying he didn't also have the same issues at OL. Observing one doesn't invalidate the other. They were both bad.

He did say it though. In response to a statement relative to the number of receivers he's been through.



You're right, however. It's been a merry-go-round on both units.

 

[Tron]

It's all on Sam. His line has been amazing for 3 years, it's like a reverse Fearsome Foursome, and he has arguably the top WR corp in the league.

 

[Ramifications]

He did say it though. In response to a statement relative to the number of receivers he's been through.



You're right, however. It's been a merry-go-round on both units.

I didn't doubt he said it. Language can be ambiguous, I can see how he may have thought it is more complex than just a WR issue, and it would be remiss to not point out it involves the OL, too, and his response doesn't necessarily have to be interpreted as the OL issues being more true than WR (which you noted).

The funny thing is, this is like debating which was a more heinous movie, Gigli, Freddie Got Fingered or Battlefield Earth. None of them will ever be confused with Ben Hur. ;^). It's also like the old Billy Crystal SNL skits where he would debate with his friend who had a worse injury!

 

[BonifayRam]

I don't think it is less true that Bradford didn't have good WRs. I get that you are focused on the OL, but it would be hard for me to look at the evidence and not conclude that both position groups were appallingly bad for much of the first three years of his career.

To answer your question, they have a lot of options. Saffold, Wells and Dahl aren't gone yet, and we will know their status prior to the draft, where they have a lot of ammo to get an OL or two. I don't think it will be necessary to take three OL in the first round, we do have other important needs, too, like WR and DB.

"Aren't gone yet" the only one I want to be a Ram is gone ....Saffold if my mind serves me right is not under any Ram contract any longer....so then you & I are holding out hope for our pair of 33 yr old interior 10.5 mil cost Ol'ers hey? Harvey Dahl & Scott Wells ....boy now there's a fine pair to hang your hope on for Sam's protection. How many injuries & surgeries & IR events & missed games between then the last two yrs?? Way too many to put in this post.....& you & I think they will be better in 2014? Hopeful we are aren't we. Having them starting @ there cap cost is not a positive in my small mind.

Our first goal should have been to build a decent talented OL around our pocket passer Sam. That has not been done....Rams have been in Fail or close to fail since Sam arrived here. I see all the youthful healthy high draft picks that's been injected into other units the last two years and what about the OL?? So the last two seasons the Org went for well seasoned OL'er (Wells, Dahl, Long, Hunter,Turner, Ojinnaka & Williams) instead.. just maybe we need to rethink about some talented fresh youthful healthy OL'ers just.... maybe one in the first two days of the drafts.

Sam is entering his 5th yr as a Ram now with so much $$$ invested in him & the OL is not in good shape in fact it remains in a weaken state. But whatever we have been doing to fix this OL has not worked..maybe we need to have a change up....No lets just draft some more WR's its working so well for Sam.:yousure:

 

[Ramifications]

"Aren't gone yet" the only one I want to be a Ram is gone ....Saffold if my mind serves me right is not under any Ram contract any longer....so then you & I are holding out hope for our pair of 33 yr old interior 10.5 mil cost Ol'ers hey? Harvey Dahl & Scott Wells ....boy now there's a fine pair to hang your hope on for Sam's protection. How many injuries & surgeries & IR events & missed games between then the last two yrs?? Way too many to put in this post.....& you & I think they will be better in 2014? Hopeful we are aren't we. Having them starting @ there cap cost is not a positive in my small mind.

Our first goal should have been to build a decent talented OL around our pocket passer Sam. That has not been done....Rams have been in Fail or close to fail since Sam arrived here. I see all the youthful healthy high draft picks that's been injected into other units the last two years and what about the OL?? So the last two seasons the Org went for well seasoned OL'er (Wells, Dahl, Long, Hunter,Turner, Ojinnaka & Williams) instead.. just maybe we need to rethink about some talented fresh youthful healthy OL'ers just.... maybe one in the first two days of the drafts.

Sam is entering his 5th yr as a Ram now with so much $$$ invested in him & the OL is not in good shape in fact it remains in a weaken state. But whatever we have been doing to fix this OL has not worked..maybe we need to have a change up....No lets just draft some more WR's its working so well for Sam.:yousure:

Like you, I want Saffold to be extended. Unlike you, I don't assume he will sign with another team. Maybe, but we don't know that yet. We will know by the draft, no need to debate it now. In the Demoff lunch thread, there was hopeful news, I heard Wagoner put it at about 40% (earlier Thomas estimated 1/3, so maybe odds are improving). If they don't extend Saffold, I question whether they would cut both Wells and Dahl, that is a lot of uncertainty that I don't think Fisher wants to deal with in year three of his regime, and risk a regression. They are old, and I can tell you are intent on grooming younger talent, which makes sense, but they have already been doing that with Jones. Wasn't he one of the first picks in the fourth, and coming off a lis-franc injury, so he probably would ave gone higher if not for that. He was an Outland trophy winner, and played pretty much everywhere on the OL and contributed to multiple national championships for Alabama.

Yeah, they should have had a better OL by now, and they also should have had better WRs in Bradford's first three years, both which stunted his progress (would you rather lose a finger or a toe, they are both bad?). Just like I wouldn't take three OL in the first round (if we trade with CLE?), I wouldn't draft multiple WRs. Watkins is a special talent that could weaponize Bradford and the entire defense, we don't have a complete WR with his talent, athleticism and skill set on the roster. Taking him wouldn't preclude also adding an OT and an interior OL in the draft.

We've already touched on this, but I would be more worried about Jake Long if he suffered a career-ending injury. What is he, 28, so I don't put him in the same category as guys like Wells and Dahl that are 32-33. We may have to cover him for part of the season.

Hypothetically, if we retain Saffold and Long returns to form, we could jettison Wells and Dahl and our OL could look like...

Long-Jones/?-Barnes/Jones-Saffold-Barksdale

That is very similar to an OL that was dominant and put up 250+ rushing yards against CHI. I don't see the situation as dire as you do? I don't see things as black and white. I'm not advocating completely sloughing OL and getting all WRs, but I also wouldn't take three OL in the first round. While we may not know if Barrett Jones can start at center or guard for us, you could say the same about Notre Dame OT/guard Martin. He would also represent an unknown. What if he is just average, and Dennard or Pryor could have taken our defense to another level?

My ideal would be to get Robinson and Watkins with the first two picks (unlikely without some maneuvering). Would that be a terrible draft? If we get one or the other and not both (more likely), I don't necessarily want to just take a LT or WR at 1.13 just to get one. Than a CB like Dennard or trade down and FS like Pryor might be more appealing. There are interior OL we could get after 1.13, and even after the first round.

 

[jap]

Sam had a veritable wall in front of him at Oklahoma in 2008, the year he posted 50 TD's and 4720 yards passing at a 67.9% clip. In the championship game his sophomore season, his Sooners lost to Tim Tebow's Florida Gators because their super fast D was quick enough to get around Sam's OL wall. The Rams need to put a wall in front of Sam to maximize his effectiveness.

 

[Ramifications]

Sam had a veritable wall in front of him at Oklahoma in 2008, the year he posted 50 TD's and 4720 yards passing at a 67.9% clip. In the championship game his sophomore season, his Sooners lost to Tim Tebow's Florida Gators because their super fast D was quick enough to get around Sam's OL wall. The Rams need to put a wall in front of Sam to maximize his effectiveness.

I don't disagree, I just don't think it is black and white, and bringing up the fact that his WRs weren't good or held him back in his first few years equates to completely ignoring that he had OL issues as well.

If Bradford had heinous collegiate WRs, multiple WRs blew out ACLs at the beginning of the year, different WRs were constantly being churned in and out of the starting lineup, they were plagued by constant drops, he doesn't have Gresham, etc., no way he even sniffs the Heisman, we don't draft him at 1.1, and we aren't having this conversation now.