Great Sb8 Article

[wrstdude]

http://www.thebackyardbanter.com/th...s-should-commit-to-sam-bradford-for-2014.html

Apologies if posted here before. Great breakdown w/ real play analysis.

 

[jjab360]

Wow, great, great read. I don't think it's been posted here before, but I may be wrong. Here's the summary for those who don't want to read an epic breakdown with statistics and visual proof:

After watching the Rams offense on the all-22 film, it is almost impossible to conclude that Sam Bradford is the root of the teams’ issues. He displayed a number of positive attributes and growth all while being placed in a dysfunctional offense. Bradford’s percentage of good throws during his injury shortened 2013 season show that he is better than both his basic statistics, and the national perception of him.

When the month of May rolls around, the St. Louis Rams will have a rare opportunity to take a blue-chip quarterback prospect. As an average team, they should not be picking this high in the draft. Despite all that, they should pass on the chance. The Rams already have a quarterback who has proven capable of leading their team.

 

[CGI_Ram]

That was an excellent read. A couple points that stood out;

1. Schottenheimer's play design fails to take advantage of the entire field
2. Sam Bradford is really good on bootlegs, though Brian Schottenheimer hardly ever gives him chances to show it.

Author's words, not mine. But I agree with his observation.

 

[max]

http://www.thebackyardbanter.com/th...s-should-commit-to-sam-bradford-for-2014.html


This is just the start of it. You need to read the link above.


The St. Louis Rams Should Commit to Sam Bradford for 2014
By: Matt Harmon
February 12, 2014

Sam Bradford hasn’t exactly lit the world on fire since he entered the NFL as the number one overall draft choice in 2010. His 79.3 career passer rating suggests he has been an average at best starter thus far. The Rams subpar records under his watch lend more credence to that assessment.

Bradford began the 2013 season on pace to record career best statistics across the board. Still, media members and fans alike were unsatisfied. The calls for Bradford’s head began to grow, especially after a poor showing against the 49ers in Thursday Night Football’s national spotlight.

Unfortunately, Sam Bradford never really got the chance to prove his doubters wrong over the course of the season. The fourth year quarterback was lost for the year with an ACL tear suffered during the seventh week of the NFL season. The chorus of doubt was actually given a new sheet of music to read from in the weeks following Bradford’s departure.

As the season progressed, the Rams offense seemed to actually improve without their franchise quarterback in the fold. The team hit on more big plays with Kellen Clemens behind center in place of Bradford. The Rams procuring upset wins over the Saints and Colts during this time only served to throw fuel on the fire. By the end of the 2013 season, it seemed the Rams had an obvious answer to what to do with Sam Bradford.

Many have decided it is time for the Rams to move on from their former top draft pick. It has been suggested they should get themselves out from under the albatross of a contract Bradford carries and use the second overall pick on one of this draft’s talented quarterbacks. The thought is Bradford has shown he isn’t good enough, and the Rams were gifted a chance to pick this high by the Washington Redskins; might as well take advantage.

Not too long ago, I was amongst those who felt that was the wisest course of action. However, after taking an in-depth look at all of Bradford’s snaps during his injury shortened 2013 campaign, my feelings have changed. The view from the eye in the sky shows a passer who flashed a ton of growth, all while still playing on a bad offense.

Charting Sam Bradford’s 2013 season

Sam Bradford’s completion percentage this season was 60.7%, and his yards per attempt figure came in at 6.44. Both of those numbers fall just at, or below, the average standards desired from NFL quarterbacks. Nothing about Bradford’s statistics scream “former number one overall pick” or “franchise quarterback”. However, as always, the basic statistics do not paint the whole picture.

By charting each of Bradford’s 2013 games you can see which areas of the field he excelled in throwing to, and how efficient he was. Completion percentage does not take into account passes that were obviously thrown away, or mistakes by other teammates. To counteract that, these charts track the percentage of good and accurate throws Bradford made, and where he made them.

Here’s Bradford’s passing efficiency chart from week one against the Cardinals:

 

[nighttrain]

That was an excellent read. A couple points that stood out;

1. Schottenheimer's play design fails to take advantage of the entire fields
2. Sam Bradford is really good on bootlegs, though Brian Schottenheimer hardly ever gives him chances to show it.

Author's words, not mine. But I agree with his observation.

Spot on by author, and CGI nailed on Schott, he better pick up his game. or just turn Bradford loose
train

 

[LesBaker]

That was an excellent read. A couple points that stood out;

1. Schottenheimer's play design fails to take advantage of the entire field
2. Sam Bradford is really good on bootlegs, though Brian Schottenheimer hardly ever gives him chances to show it.

Author's words, not mine. But I agree with his observation.

How much of this is because of the young WR's though. We have a lot of converging drivers here IMO, the OL, the issues with youngsters learning, the style of play early on, Bradford himself, BS not designing the right plays for the players early on, some excellent defenses to tangle with.

There isn't a vacuum to measure all of this in and you have to look at everything, because everything factors in, each thing I mentioned and maybe a couple of others were real things that effected results.

 

[Prime Time]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/17/report-rams-dont-intend-to-extend-bradfords-deal/

Report: Rams don’t intend to extend Bradford’s deal
Posted by Mike Florio on February 17, 2014, 6:03 PM EST

Getty Images

The Rams would like to extend the contract of quarterback Sam Bradford. Unless they don’t. Unless they presently have no intention to do so but may do so in the future.

It’s all become sort of confusing.

The latest report comes from Jason La Canfora of CBS Sports, who says that the Rams “have absolutely no intention” to extend Bradford’s contract. His claim that the new report is “contrary to a midseason report” strongly implies that, even then, the Rams didn’t want to extend Bradford’s contract.

And that’s where it gets weird. La Canfora isn’t simply throwing high and tight at Adam Schefter, Jay Glazer, or Ian Rapoport; there was no “report” that the Rams want to extend Bradford’s contract. Rams COO Kevin Demoff said so.

Specifically, Demoff said, “We’ve decided Bradford is our guy. If they wanted to do a contract extension, we would do it.”

We reported in response to Demoff’s declaration that there currently are no talks. It appeared that the Rams were interested in buying low, before Bradford possibly made a big push in the final two-plus years of his rookie deal. A subsequent torn ACL has complicated things, and perhaps the Rams have since decided to take a wait-and-see approach with Bradford.

But then there’s the “contract to a midseason report” knife twist, which means that, according to La Canfora, the Rams didn’t want to extend Bradford when Demoff publicly said they did.

The question of whether the Rams want to extend Bradford glosses over the question of whether he has done enough from 2010 through 2013 to merit a salary of $14 million and a cap number of $17.6 million in 2014 and/or a salary of $12.9 million and a cap number of $16.5 million in 2015. That’s a huge investment for a guy with a career record of 20-28-1 and a career passer rating of 79.3.

But then there’s the question that every team with a good-but-not-great quarterback must consider. If you release the bird in the hand, you may up with a turd in the bush.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

That was an excellent read. A couple points that stood out;

1. Schottenheimer's play design fails to take advantage of the entire field
2. Sam Bradford is really good on bootlegs, though Brian Schottenheimer hardly ever gives him chances to show it.

Author's words, not mine. But I agree with his observation.

Yeah but he kind of turned him loose in the panthers game. The offense looked very good in that game and was probably a sign of things to come. Then Sam got injured.

.

 

[Boffo97]

Between this, and the 23 and 30 thing, anyone thinking Sam is the problem is either looking solely at the W-L record, assuming it's him and refusing to think any further; or has some sort of personal vendetta (maybe they liked Suh and really really want to be "proven right")

I've used the metaphor before of a broken car. The W-L record tells us something in the car is broken. But if you just keep assuming that the problem is the engine and fixing that, you'll never actually fix the problem if it's elsewhere.

 

[rhinobean]

Maybe if the offense doesn't produce, Schotty'll be looking for a job! Makes sense to me!

 

[RamFan503]

That was an excellent piece and it is apparent by looking at his body of work that he is not some kind of Bradford or Rams homer. Nice to see an objective piece that really looks at what happened this past season.

Could someone send this piece to Schotty?

 

[RamFan503]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/17/report-rams-dont-intend-to-extend-bradfords-deal/

Report: Rams don’t intend to extend Bradford’s deal
Posted by Mike Florio on February 17, 2014, 6:03 PM EST

Getty Images

The Rams would like to extend the contract of quarterback Sam Bradford. Unless they don’t. Unless they presently have no intention to do so but may do so in the future.

It’s all become sort of confusing.

The latest report comes from Jason La Canfora of CBS Sports, who says that the Rams “have absolutely no intention” to extend Bradford’s contract. His claim that the new report is “contrary to a midseason report” strongly implies that, even then, the Rams didn’t want to extend Bradford’s contract.

And that’s where it gets weird. La Canfora isn’t simply throwing high and tight at Adam Schefter, Jay Glazer, or Ian Rapoport; there was no “report” that the Rams want to extend Bradford’s contract. Rams COO Kevin Demoff said so.

Specifically, Demoff said, “We’ve decided Bradford is our guy. If they wanted to do a contract extension, we would do it.”

We reported in response to Demoff’s declaration that there currently are no talks. It appeared that the Rams were interested in buying low, before Bradford possibly made a big push in the final two-plus years of his rookie deal. A subsequent torn ACL has complicated things, and perhaps the Rams have since decided to take a wait-and-see approach with Bradford.

But then there’s the “contract to a midseason report” knife twist, which means that, according to La Canfora, the Rams didn’t want to extend Bradford when Demoff publicly said they did.

The question of whether the Rams want to extend Bradford glosses over the question of whether he has done enough from 2010 through 2013 to merit a salary of $14 million and a cap number of $17.6 million in 2014 and/or a salary of $12.9 million and a cap number of $16.5 million in 2015. That’s a huge investment for a guy with a career record of 20-28-1 and a career passer rating of 79.3.

But then there’s the question that every team with a good-but-not-great quarterback must consider. If you release the bird in the hand, you may up with a turd in the bush.

My understanding - and I think KD even said it in the same interview this article quotes - is that it was Bradford who didn't want to negotiate an extension until after he comes back from the injury and is able to play the 2014 season. Supposedly he did not want to negotiate from a point of weakness and is confident that he will strengthen his case during the 2014 season. It didn't sound like there was a problem with that as far as Rams brass were concerned and I believe that is also where KD indicated that Sam's contract was not going to be an issue in regards to being able to sign players.

 

[rdlkgliders]

He has to be given every chance to succeed and hopefully this is his year. However Sam is not without flaws and areas of needed growth ex: he needs to be decisive and aggressive ( Sam is partly responsible for the exaggerated number of check downs and short plays leading to his low YPA.) Sam needs to have a more cutthroat attitude and throw receivers open, take more chances but don't be careless with the ball.

 

[max]

That was an excellent read. A couple points that stood out;

1. Schottenheimer's play design fails to take advantage of the entire field
2. Sam Bradford is really good on bootlegs, though Brian Schottenheimer hardly ever gives him chances to show it.

Author's words, not mine. But I agree with his observation.

My view on Schotty is that he is an average OC at best. And the bigger problem I have is with Fisher. Schotty was a controversial pick. He has had more people saying he is an awful OC than saying he's a good OC. Yet, Fisher has stayed with him now into his 3rd year. And this after going through a revolving door at DC.

I know there are some revered posters who say Schotty is not the problem. That just doesn't ring true to me. Dan Shonka told me that the Rams need a new OC, and I trust his judgement. Schotty may not be terrible, but he's not good enough.

 

[Boffo97]

My understanding - and I think KD even said it in the same interview this article quotes - is that it was Bradford who didn't want to negotiate an extension until after he comes back from the injury and is able to play the 2014 season. Supposedly he did not want to negotiate from a point of weakness and is confident that he will strengthen his case during the 2014 season. It didn't sound like there was a problem with that as far as Rams brass were concerned and I believe that is also where KD indicated that Sam's contract was not going to be an issue in regards to being able to sign players.

I think that's what Florio is addressing with the bit of "His claim that the new report is “contrary to a midseason report” strongly implies that, even then, the Rams didn’t want to extend Bradford’s contract."

 

[LesBaker]

That was an excellent piece and it is apparent by looking at his body of work that he is not some kind of Bradford or Rams homer. Nice to see an objective piece that really looks at what happened this past season.

Could someone send this piece to Schotty?

Somebody should send it to Bernie and tell him that's what sports writing really is........he may not recognize it though.

 

[fearsomefour]

Generally I don't like roll outs.
You are helping the D by making them defend half the field. There are exceptions and good play designs of course and situational stuff. You see a lot of young QBs get a bunch of roll outs....one or two options usually right in front of you and a run option.
I am over simplifying but to me a bunch of rollouts reflects a lack of trust....either in the QB or the protection.

 

[wrstdude]

Glad it was new for you guys. It was, by far, the best unbiased breakdown of the Ram's offense that I have seen. Of course it helps it aligns w/ what I see/saw.

 

[rdlkgliders]

Glad it was new for you guys. It was, by far, the best unbiased breakdown of the Ram's offense that I have seen. Of course it helps it aligns w/ what I see/saw.

I forgot to mention good read fair and insightful. Thanks wrstdude

 

[RamFan503]

I think that's what Florio is addressing with the bit of "His claim that the new report is “contrary to a midseason report” strongly implies that, even then, the Rams didn’t want to extend Bradford’s contract."

Could be but I thought it was something KD said in one of his recent interviews. So much stuff to read and keep straight - I can't guarantee that.