Sam Bradford's best game

[bwdenverram]

Don't disagree with that. Obviously Dilfer didn't elevate. I also think the 2000 Ravens are an obvious exception where a below average QB won a SB. I certainly hope Bradford will not be a Dilfer. I want him to be the difference and be the reason we win.... Not just along for the ride

Yeah, I understand and I think Sam is WAY better than Dilfer. I also get that people have a hard time seeing it right now. But Sam has had some tough pieces to deal with around him.
You only become the #1 pick because your team sucks. And we sucked, badly. Nobody could of come in and made us a playoff team in those situations. Now you're seeing the rest of the team get much better and I truly believe Sam will finally get to show what he's all about.

 

[The Rammer]

I am not a Bradford supporter. I truly wish I could be excited as some of you are about the future of the Rams. I could not agree more that you have to build a team through the trenches like San Fran and Seattle. However both of those teams actually can score points on offense as they both ranked in the top 11 of points scored.

Is there a game Sam Bradford has played in the NFL which would lead someone to believe he has a chance to be a quality starting quarterback in the future? I do not mean this as an insult, but would like an honest discussion and would like to go back and watch games which people recommend.

I know he has had to deal with less than ideal circumstances, but if he is a good quarterback you would think there are a few outliers of games where he played very well.

PS - Just because you do not believe Sam is a good quarterback does not mean you are a Rams basher. I have supported this team for a long time through some really awful years. I want Bradford to do well, but I simply do not think he our answer. Please do not tell me to find another team.

Remember this and remember this well, Peyton Manning wasn't Peyton Manning early on because he had sh*t for a supporting cast. It makes the biggest difference from being good to great

 

[The Rammer]

Go back and watch the 49ers games two years ago, especially the second one. Lost in the GZ heroics is Sam carrying that offense to kicking range. Scrambling for first downs, extending plays, making great reads. Those last two minutes.

There are so many more examples, but if you want a quick fix there you go.

And that pass to Amendola that was called back for the 'tripping' penalty that only seems to ever get called against the Rams. That pass won the game, then got called back, and Bradford drove us down regardless and we tied. But if the refs didn't screw us with that tripping call we win. And Bradford's pass was as good as a Manning/Brady bomb.

I think because of my hate for 49ers mostly, that play will always be in my memory.

Illegal formation thanks to Brandon "stupid" Gibson. lol

I sooo hate hated how the game got thrown away because of Stupid Brandon Gibson. wow.... just wow

 

[Speed]

True. It doesn't mean anything to me. I should have clarified it that way, because it clearly means something to you. Which is fine.

For every example you provide, I can counter it with examples using the same players. For example. Kurt Warner had a 2-8 record his first year with the Cardinals, and Josh McCown had a 3-3 record. Who was the better elevator? He was 1-4 as a starter the next year and Matt Freaking Leinart was 4-7. Year after that he was 5-6 and Leinart was 3-2. As far as winning percentages go, both are better than Warner at elevating players. Right? Besides that, why would Warner wait 3 years to elevate everyone? That seems kind of odd. Why not do it right away?

And the worst offensive line in SB history? Hardly. They were ranked 9th in pass protection. They just couldn't run block very well. And if you tell me that Warner did that, then why didn't he do it the other years? When he left, they simply had no one even remotely close to being a backup as their starters. Anderson, Skelton, Hall, Kolb, Lindley, Hoyer? lol. Same with the Colts. You're probably better than Curtis Painter. Where are any of these guys now?

But let's use your argument again. If the Rams are trotting out a beat up Bulger, a washed up Boller, and a never was in Keith Null, and that team won exactly one game, then Bradford coming in and winning 7 (I don't subscribe to QB wins, btw), clearly makes him an elevator of men, yeah? That's what you're telling me, anyway. And what a magnificent supporting cast HE had at the time too, huh? So, if you claim elevation is a "thing", then Bradford has it. I claim it's not a thing, but it's instead a team sport with varying degrees of talent at 22 different positions, and the production of the QB can be directly proportional to the support he has at the time + a myriad of other factors. That's not to say all QBs are created equal. Merely that good ones need help too. Elite ones can get by with less. crappy ones are always going to be crappy.

Well sure you can counter all you like.... But that makes no sense to me. As in none. We fundamentally aren't even speaking the same language. Honestly your explanation of Kurt and Cards is bizzare.

I stand by my opinion and feel quite confident with it. Thanks for the conversation but it's pretty clear this one is going nowhere.

 

[Speed]

Yeah, I understand and I think Sam is WAY better than Dilfer. I also get that people have a hard time seeing it right now. But Sam has had some tough pieces to deal with around him.
You only become the #1 pick because your team sucks. And we sucked, badly. Nobody could of come in and made us a playoff team in those situations. Now you're seeing the rest of the team get much better and I truly believe Sam will finally get to show what he's all about.

Hope you're right... And Lord yes Sam is better than Dilfer. I wasn't implying that lol

 

[bwdenverram]

Hope you're right... And Lord yes Sam is better than Dilfer. I wasn't implying that lol

I think most agree (even those that really love SB) that if he sucks this year it's time to move on.

But I don't think it'll be an issue. We'll see.

 

[wrstdude]

Anybody know where I can buy some elevation dust & some dragon eggs?

 

[-X-]

Well sure you can counter all you like.... But that makes no sense to me. As in none. We fundamentally aren't even speaking the same language. Honestly your explanation of Kurt and Cards is bizzare.

I stand by my opinion and feel quite confident with it. Thanks for the conversation but it's pretty clear this one is going nowhere.

That's your response? lol.

You left a lot of questions unanswered there, but that's okay. I know why.

 

[Alan]

wrstdude wanting shopping hints:
Anybody know where I can buy some elevation dust & some dragon eggs?

Diagon Alley.

 

[kohhwf]

Looks like I need to take a better look at the Carolina game. Still pisses me off he got hurt especially when he might have started to play his best football. He could have thrived under the new offensive system for a large sample size. I just pray we are not having this discussion next year. I might warm up a little bit more if he would just pick a helmet that fits his dang head.

 

[mr.stlouis]

Nah that's not it. Just win a couple of close games for them. On 4th and goal throw the winning TD pass... Watch how things change. MO is the show me state

On the road with the Niners or Hawks are up by 4 and the Rams need a TD to win.... Kill it there. That's when everyone will be on board

Yeah, I could see that.

I just don't see how people think Wilson and Kapernici are that good, then bash Sam. I'm including opposing fans here, too. If Sam doesn't get hurt last year then he has a heck of a season, maybe best in the division. That's where my concerns lye. Good think we got Hill just in case.

Drafting a QB later is a good idea.

 

[Speed]

N

That's your response? lol.

You left a lot of questions unanswered there, but that's okay. I know why.

no not really... I was pretty clear in my responses what I meant

You clearly aren't in the same ballpark with that line of thinking.... And honestly I don't know how you couldn't be but I accept it. I have been clear how QBs elevate their teams. You in turn compared Kurt Warner to Josh McCown and Matt Linehart. <shrug>. Sorry I'm thinking there isn't much to talk about.

 

[-X-]

N

no not really... I was pretty clear in my responses what I meant

You clearly aren't in the same ballpark with that line of thinking.... And honestly I don't know how you couldn't be but I accept it. I have been clear how QBs elevate their teams. You in turn compared Kurt Warner to Josh McCown and Matt Linehart. <shrug>. Sorry I'm thinking there isn't much to talk about.

You didn't read a word I said then. I asked you specific questions using your own 'elevation' criteria, in order to make you think about your definition of it, and that's all I did. I've seen this happen before. Posters challenge other posters and completely avoid the counter-argument or label it as incomprehensible because they don't like how the responses chip away at their theories. That's fine, Speed. I'm not looking to argue with you about this. Just be careful when you ask people to "be prepared to talk intelligently about it." You just might get what you wanted.

 

[Alan]

Speed with these nuggets:
A QB that is nimble or mobile in or out of the pocket doesn't make an offensive line better? Some QB also throw their WRs open when there is tight coverage. They will deliver a ball to a WR even when he appears to be covered... they throw it to a place only the WR can get to it.

A QB that throws a ball with touch rather that firing a bullet is not making a pass potentially easier for a receiver to catch it?

There have been plenty of games where he has shown he can be a quality starter. My question is can he be a difference maker.

Brees, Brady, P Manning are all QBs that elevate the talent around them.

A nimble QB doesn't make the O-line better, it just allows him to get away from the rushers easier and sometimes gives him more time. A QB doesn't throw their WRs open. If the QB throws the ball to where only the WR can catch it then the WR was open by definition. He just didn't have much separation.

No one "elevates" another persons game, they just take advantage of their strengths and give them every chance to succeed IMO.

I also see no difference between a quality starter and a difference maker. A quality starter is a difference maker or he isn't a quality starter. Every starter is a difference maker for good, bad or something in between.

I agree with you that SB hasn't completely mastered throwing the ball with touch yet. I'm hoping for an improvement this year in that regard.

 

[Speed]

Yeah, I could see that.

I just don't see how people think Wilson and Kapernici are that good, then bash Sam. I'm including opposing fans here, too. If Sam doesn't get hurt last year then he has a heck of a season, maybe best in the division. That's where my concerns lye. Good think we got Hill just in case.

Drafting a QB later is a good idea.

I'm pretty sure the Kap and Wilson stuff comes out of their ability to make something happen even when their offenses aren't functioning perfectly. I mean Wilson has thrown nearly 60 TDs in his 1st two years and win a SB. People try and minimize his impact but he's been awfully good. I also think the perception that all of the teams in the NFC west are so similar so why can't Sam do what they do.

Truth is it really set the offenses progress back when Sam got hurt. Who knows if he stays healthy maybe we aren't asking some of these same questions.

My confidence in him is low....but I would love for him to surprise me.

 

[Speed]

You didn't read a word I said then. I asked you specific questions using your own 'elevation' criteria, in order to make you think about your definition of it, and that's all I did. I've seen this happen before. Posters challenge other posters and completely avoid the counter-argument or label it as incomprehensible because they don't like how the responses chip away at their theories. That's fine, Speed. I'm not looking to argue with you about this. Just be careful when you ask people to "be prepared to talk intelligently about it." You just might get what you wanted.

But you see X that's the problem. I don't believe you are speaking intelligently. That's pretty tough for me so yes I have tried to diplomatically end the conversation.

 

[-X-]

But you see X that's the problem. I don't believe you are speaking intelligently. That's pretty tough for me so yes I have tried to diplomatically end the conversation.

Mkay then. We'll go with that.

Thanks.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Go back and watch the 49ers games two years ago, especially the second one. Lost in the GZ heroics is Sam carrying that offense to kicking range. Scrambling for first downs, extending plays, making great reads. Those last two minutes.

There are so many more examples, but if you want a quick fix there you go.

Sam is something like 5-2-1 in the division. You could start there. Just throw out the SF game last year.

 

[Speed]

Mkay then. We'll go with that.

Thanks.

Np lol

 

[jrry32]

Well it doesn't mean anything to you

And there certainly is nothing wrong with having a different opinion. But when you say stuff like this "Seriously. It's a catch-phrase that means nothing" it's hard to believe that you actually mean that.

Anyhow I have very clearly laid out how QBs elevate their teams. IMO it's pretty obvious how that happens. I will briefly go into it again. Brady and Manning clearly operate at a much higher rate mentally than most QBs. Their quick releases and ability to read and quickly diagnose how a defense is attempting to attack them elevates their team in spite of other weaknesses the offense might have like a poor offensive line or WR that aren't that good. I also clearly mentioned a QB who was nimble in the pocket or even mobile that helps a oline that is stressed. Also a QB that can make throws while moving athletically can also make plays when the design of the play breaks down. Aaron Rogers and Drew Brees are examples of QBs who also do this. Kurt Warner played behind one of the worst offensive lines any SB or playoff team ever has.... Yet despite that because of his ability to dissect defenses, and recognize coverages designed specifically to stop him he made the line look better than it actually was. We know this because before him the Cardinals were garbage and giving up record numbers of sacks and after him they were garbage and giving up record numbers of sacks. Peyton Manning leaves the Colts and they go 1-15. They add Andrew Luck and they are a playoff team. Manning joins the Broncos and they become a SB contending juggernaut.

Sure, have a different opinion all you want. However, a QB having a quick release vs a slow one, willing to throw WRs open who are tightly covered, that can make a play when pressured rather than checking it down as soon as he feels pressure obviously is an example of elevating the team around him.

I would love to Bradford start doing those things.

And honestly this conversation seems so odd given the Rams drafted Robinson with the clear intent that his addition will elevate Bradford, Zack Stacy, and the rest of the offensive line. I have no idea why anyone believes that QBs don't have similar impacts on their football teams. IMO that is just a strange argument to make. <shrug>

You're not really describing a player being elevated. You're describing a better individual player improving the entire unit. Football is a team game so if you improve individual performance at a position...such as Greg Robinson vs. Chris Williams or Peyton Manning vs. Kellen Clemens...you're going to see results for the entire unit. Because each player affects the guy next to him.

But they're not elevating that guy. Scott Wells is the same guy. They're just simply making it easier for that guy to do their job because they're doing their job better.

Still, we're all more or less arguing semantics. However, I can understand anyone's frustration with the whole "Bradford doesn't elevate talent" argument because it's pretty meaningless in the sense that it can't really be argued for or against.