No more incompletes for Bradford

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
He doesn't even need the play-action. Or 3.5 seconds (3.3 is sufficient). Just needs a clean pocket.

Wish I coulda seen that video...

Sam would shred with a clean pocket, no doubt. This offense did so much better with a strong running game, though.
 

F. Mulder

Starter
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
773
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.


I completely understand your take and agree. We are NOT experts and they are; but the fact remains that Bradford's performance based on current and projected salary as well as draft position will play heavily whether they are viewed as being correct in their assessment or not. If Bradford becomes the QB many of us believe he can, then he is worth the money, investment, and draft status. If he fails due to injury(ies), poor performance, or, even if it is not fair, overall team mediocrity, then that will fall directly on Fisher and the FO. I for one hope they are right but would like to see an above average 2014 before I hitch my wagon the rest of the way.
 

F. Mulder

Starter
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
773
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.
I agree and would argue that that is the difference between the league average QB and those who are above average. MOST average QBs don't lose games themselves, but they don't win many games themselves either. Most below average QBs don't win many games on their own and manage to lose some more on their own in the process. Upper tier QBs don't usually lose games because of their play AND WIN games, often games they have no business winning. IMO Bradford needs to be in the upper category.
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #87
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.

There's a reason a guy who throws for over 4600 yards and only has a rating of 84.2 is mediocre. It's because he's throwing too many picks in relation to TDs. 29 TDs and 19 INTs is not lighting it up by any stretch. And X, you're too smart not to look at the INTs. And you know as well as I do that they aren't impressive. Also, I would guess that you've seen the Lions play this year. And if you did you'd see an inconsistent QB who forced the ball and made many bad decisions.

I expect with our DL and and STs and running game that we won't have to ask Bradford to light it up to have a winning season. That's a key point in all of this. He will actually be asked to do LESS than Stafford. Can he do that? I expect the Rams D and STs to prevent Bradford from having to do any more than what Russell Wilson was required to do last year. The Rams are probably gonna run the ball at least 35 times a game, and pass less than 20 times.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
33,812
Name
Stu
The Rams are probably gonna run the ball at least 35 times a game, and pass less than 20 times.

This I doubt. One reason is that the Rams DO have a passing QB. The other is that there is no reason to limit Sam like they did KC. I'm going to guess that the run/pass ratio will be very equal unless we get out to early leads. Even still, if we do get out to early leads, Sam will then likely be asked to play the clock management passing game along with a run heavy offense. This will just bring out more of the detractors because it will look like Sam is checking down when in reality, he is sticking to the game plan.

I hope we do have several games where Sam only has 20 attempts. That will likely mean we got out to an early lead and are thumping them on the defensive side as well.

One other point that keeps being brought up in relation to Sam. Can anyone list the QBs that have had more game winning drives and/or 4th quarter comebacks than Sam over the last four years? I'm honestly curious. There may be a long list or it could be yet another case of the grass being greener.
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #90
I agree and would argue that that is the difference between the league average QB and those who are above average. MOST average QBs don't lose games themselves, but they don't win many games themselves either. Most below average QBs don't win many games on their own and manage to lose some more on their own in the process. Upper tier QBs don't usually lose games because of their play AND WIN games, often games they have no business winning. IMO Bradford needs to be in the upper category.

Good points, FM.

How many games did Russell Wilson WIN that he had no business winning? I maintain that the answer is none. How many times do you think he bought the Seahawks from behind with his passing game when they were behind by more than a TD in the 4th quarter? Answer NONE.

We are not asking Bradford to be Andrew Luck, we are just asking him to do as much as Russell Wilson. If he does that we will have a winning season and he stays. And they will work out an amenable contract to both sides.

But Bradford will be put in game situations where the game is in the balance and he will be under pressure and he will have to make a play. I've seen him do it, he just has to do it consistently against top competition and stay on the damn field.
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #91
This I doubt. One reason is that the Rams DO have a passing QB. The other is that there is no reason to limit Sam like they did KC. I'm going to guess that the run/pass ratio will be very equal unless we get out to early leads. Even still, if we do get out to early leads, Sam will then likely be asked to play the clock management passing game along with a run heavy offense. This will just bring out more of the detractors because it will look like Sam is checking down when in reality, he is sticking to the game plan.

I hope we do have several games where Sam only has 20 attempts. That will likely mean we got out to an early lead and are thumping them on the defensive side as well.

One other point that keeps being brought up in relation to Sam. Can anyone list the QBs that have had more game winning drives and/or 4th quarter comebacks than Sam over the last four years? I'm honestly curious. There may be a long list or it could be yet another case of the grass being greener.

Let's just count passes beyond the LOS.
 

Yamahopper

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,838
I completely understand your take and agree. We are NOT experts and they are; but the fact remains that Bradford's performance based on current and projected salary as well as draft position will play heavily whether they are viewed as being correct in their assessment or not. If Bradford becomes the QB many of us believe he can, then he is worth the money, investment, and draft status. If he fails due to injury(ies), poor performance, or, even if it is not fair, overall team mediocrity, then that will fall directly on Fisher and the FO. I for one hope they are right but would like to see an above average 2014 before I hitch my wagon the rest of the way.
I agree. But what kind of quarterback should Bradford be? Does his draft position still figure in it? that was years ago. What's his salary have to do with it? No matter what player was picked at that spot was getting similar money, if the Rams took Josh Hull #1 he would have been paid close to that because that's what that slot payed under the old system. Bradford salary is a strawman argument.
Do people expect him to be Peyton Manning cause he was #1 ? (Love this one) This is what separates the causal fan from the hard core fans. Bradford will never be Manning, He doesn't have the same skill set. But who else does? Think Rivers. Rams needed a QB that year and he was the best one.

Bradford like every other player is a product of the scheme. He runs the plays he's given with the teammates he's given. Bradford might want to throw 60 times a game, he might want to take more risks, care less about interceptions, go for 400 yard games etc. But he is a team player and follows the scheme. Win and lose as a team.

I see your points.
But the Rams didn't have to draft him but they did, they could have let him go and they didn't, nope didn't cut his pay either.
So for better or worse he's it in the judgement of the FO. And that's what they get payed for.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
33,812
Name
Stu
Let's just count passes beyond the LOS.
Like everyone else does? Or was there supposed to be some blue font there? I think I get that you're saying the passes that aren't are about the same as a running play but do we use the same criteria on QBs not named Bradford?
 

ED_29

Guest
Good points, FM.

How many games did Russell Wilson WIN that he had no business winning? I maintain that the answer is none. How many times do you think he bought the Seahawks from behind with his passing game when they were behind by more than a TD in the 4th quarter? Answer NONE.

We are not asking Bradford to be Andrew Luck, we are just asking him to do as much as Russell Wilson. If he does that we will have a winning season and he stays. And they will work out an amenable contract to both sides.

But Bradford will be put in game situations where the game is in the balance and he will be under pressure and he will have to make a play. I've seen him do it, he just has to do it consistently against top competition and stay on the damn field.
In the NFC Championship game the Hawks were down and on a 4th and goal from the 7 throws the winning TD. Wilson also has throw 26tds in each of the last two seasons. IMO its foolish to dismiss what Wilson did in that offense with those receivers while being sacked 44 times and behind the worst pass blocking line if football.

So yes if Bradford can be Wilson while not having all of those things go wrong as Wilson faced last year... the Rams should be well on their way. Its gravy should he do better while not facing the same adversity
 

ED_29

Guest
I agree. But what kind of quarterback should Bradford be? Does his draft position still figure in it? that was years ago. What's his salary have to do with it? No matter what player was picked at that spot was getting similar money, if the Rams took Josh Hull #1 he would have been paid close to that because that's what that slot payed under the old system. Bradford salary is a strawman argument.
Do people expect him to be Peyton Manning cause he was #1 ? (Love this one) This is what separates the causal fan from the hard core fans. Bradford will never be Manning, He doesn't have the same skill set. But who else does? Think Rivers. Rams needed a QB that year and he was the best one.

Bradford like every other player is a product of the scheme. He runs the plays he's given with the teammates he's given. Bradford might want to throw 60 times a game, he might want to take more risks, care less about interceptions, go for 400 yard games etc. But he is a team player and follows the scheme. Win and lose as a team.

I see your points.
But the Rams didn't have to draft him but they did, they could have let him go and they didn't, nope didn't cut his pay either.
So for better or worse he's it in the judgement of the FO. And that's what they get payed for.


Ok but... don't dismiss Bradford's conservative nature. QBs often have many options any given play. Some QB are willing to take more chances than others. Bradford has a career 6.2 ypa... that is not good... and its not always because of scheme. IMO he is too conservative and will eschew the big play for a dump off, combine that with a conservative ocoordinator and head coach and you have a perfect storm.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
33,812
Name
Stu
I agree. But what kind of quarterback should Bradford be? Does his draft position still figure in it? that was years ago. What's his salary have to do with it? No matter what player was picked at that spot was getting similar money, if the Rams took Josh Hull #1 he would have been paid close to that because that's what that slot payed under the old system. Bradford salary is a strawman argument.
Do people expect him to be Peyton Manning cause he was #1 ? (Love this one) This is what separates the causal fan from the hard core fans. Bradford will never be Manning, He doesn't have the same skill set. But who else does? Think Rivers. Rams needed a QB that year and he was the best one.

Bradford like every other player is a product of the scheme. He runs the plays he's given with the teammates he's given. Bradford might want to throw 60 times a game, he might want to take more risks, care less about interceptions, go for 400 yard games etc. But he is a team player and follows the scheme. Win and lose as a team.

I see your points.
But the Rams didn't have to draft him but they did, they could have let him go and they didn't, nope didn't cut his pay either.
So for better or worse he's it in the judgement of the FO. And that's what they get payed for.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Just sayin'

And if I recall Yams - you are not one who just praises Sam out of hand. You've had your criticisms of the man IIRR. This just makes SO much sense.

And in the end, Sam's play will write its own script. Where he was drafted, what he has been paid, etc... will mean nada.
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #97
In the NFC Championship game the Hawks were down and on a 4th and goal from the 7 throws the winning TD. Wilson also has throw 26tds in each of the last two seasons. IMO its foolish to dismiss what Wilson did in that offense with those receivers while being sacked 44 times and behind the worst pass blocking line if football.

So yes if Bradford can be Wilson while not having all of those things go wrong as Wilson faced last year... the Rams should be well on their way. Its gravy should he do better while not facing the same adversity

That EXACTLY what I'm talking about in reference to FM's post. Wilson was asked to make plays under duress in critical situations. He was not asked to bring his team back from a big deficit like Andrew Luck did against KC last year in the playoffs. And 26 TDs isn't a whole lot nowadays, certainly not top tier QB numbers.
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,082
Name
Burger man
billbored.gif