St. Louis Rams: Bringing Back Bradford?

[blackbart]

Bradford won 3 of 7 starts last year with a defense that was playing better than the defense was playing this year. On top of that, of those 7 games 3 were against 3 of the worst teams in the game. The schedule thisnyear has been leaps and bounds harder.
So yeah, to just assume hed be good for any more wins than what we have is just dreaming. But by all means carry on.

The defense was not playing very good at the beginning of last year. And the wins and losses are a team stat not a QB stat

 

[dieterbrock]

The defense was not playing very good at the beginning of last year. And the wins and losses are a team stat not a QB stat

Yeah wins and losses are a team stat until the subject is how they would have won more with Bradford. Can't have it both ways.
I'm finding myself backed in to a corner here so I'll tap out. We need all the positive mojo we can for this weekend. Go Rams

 

[LesBaker]

Ugh

 

[mr.stlouis]

We only have to wait several months before we find the resolution,too. Oh boy!

 

[jrry32]

Bradford won 3 of 7 starts last year with a defense that was playing better than the defense was playing this year. On top of that, of those 7 games 3 were against 3 of the worst teams in the game. The schedule thisnyear has been leaps and bounds harder.
So yeah, to just assume hed be good for any more wins than what we have is just dreaming. But by all means carry on.

Bradford's 7 Starts
PPG Allowed - 26.3 PPG

Davis's 9 Starts
PPG Allowed - 27.9 PPG

The difference between the two is 1.6 PPG. The defense was playing at about the same level. Like this year, the defense didn't start to turn it on until midway through the season.

I don't think anyone here, including you, would argue that the offensive talent was performing nearly as well last year as it has been this year.

So yea, I feel great about my opinion here. You can fucking bet we'd have more wins with Bradford than Davis. If that's dreaming, you must not think Bradford is any good.

Because the QB is the most important position on the field and Bradford is a better QB than Davis. I think it's hard to argue logically that the team wouldn't do better.

 

[Mackeyser]

Well, jrry, you and I are in complete agreement here!

I'm just gonna sit back and savor this moment...

 

[blackbart]

Yeah wins and losses are a team stat until the subject is how they would have won more with Bradford. Can't have it both ways.
I'm finding myself backed in to a corner here so I'll tap out. We need all the positive mojo we can for this weekend. Go Rams

No worries Rams brother we're all here for the same bottom line

 

[dbrooks25]

Bradford won 3 of 7 starts last year with a defense that was playing better than the defense was playing this year. On top of that, of those 7 games 3 were against 3 of the worst teams in the game. The schedule thisnyear has been leaps and bounds harder.
So yeah, to just assume hed be good for any more wins than what we have is just dreaming. But by all means carry on.

LOL, nice try. Go look up the stats, Bro, Bradford was not the problem at all. You do realize the Rams had NO running game for about 5 or 6 of those 7 games, correct? Let me refresh your memory: In those 17 games, Bradford threw 14td to 4 int, 1,687 yards, had a 60.7 completion rate, and a 90.9 qbr. Yeah, I will assume he would be good for a couple of more wins.

 

[dbrooks25]

Bradford's 7 Starts
PPG Allowed - 26.3 PPG

Davis's 9 Starts
PPG Allowed - 27.9 PPG

The difference between the two is 1.6 PPG. The defense was playing at about the same level. Like this year, the defense didn't start to turn it on until midway through the season.

I don't think anyone here, including you, would argue that the offensive talent was performing nearly as well last year as it has been this year.

So yea, I feel great about my opinion here. You can freaking bet we'd have more wins with Bradford than Davis. If that's dreaming, you must not think Bradford is any good.

Because the QB is the most important position on the field and Bradford is a better QB than Davis. I think it's hard to argue logically that the team wouldn't do better.

I think you hit the nail on the head, jrry, he doesn't think Bradford is any good or he at least thinks Davis is the better QB. I've said it before, but having Bradford under center would have a the very least nullified those costly turnovers that sealed the deal at the end of the close games. True, there are other factors to consider in these losses but as many say good teams overcome bad calls or whatever else and most of those good teams have very solid QB play.

 

[jrry32]

I think you hit the nail on the head, jrry, he doesn't think Bradford is any good or he at least thinks Davis is the better QB. I've said it before, but having Bradford under center would have a the very least nullified those costly turnovers that sealed the deal at the end of the close games. True, there are other factors to consider in these losses but as many say good teams overcome bad calls or whatever else and most of those good teams have very solid QB play.

I don't think either is true. Which is why I am confused as to why Dieter is arguing with me on this. Logically, if Bradford is the better QB then it's going to translate to more wins...if the QB position makes a difference on the outcome in games. I don't think the latter is going to be argued by anyone.

I'm not putting the losses squarely on Davis. You win as a team and lose as a team. But it's just depressing...and positive for our future...that with better QB play, this team could very easily be 5-4 or 6-3.

Davis has really hurt us late in close games. Say what you will for Bradford but he stepped up in those situations whereas Davis lets the pressure get to him and makes bad decisions.

I don't think it's unrealistic to believe we would have beaten Dallas and Arizona with Bradford. Hell, we should have beaten Dallas with Davis. But Cook dropped the TD, Dallas took the lead, and Davis imploded.

 

[Mikey Ram]

Bradford won 3 of 7 starts last year with a defense that was playing better than the defense was playing this year. On top of that, of those 7 games 3 were against 3 of the worst teams in the game. The schedule thisnyear has been leaps and bounds harder.
So yeah, to just assume hed be good for any more wins than what we have is just dreaming. But by all means carry on.

Thanks for allowing us to "carry on"...Very gracious of you

 

[dieterbrock]

Wow. I thought this place was one where opinions could be shared?
I didn't discredit Bradford AT ALL in this thread.
No matter what stats you want to pull, Bradford w/l record hasn't been good. So to just assume wins on his behalf is not accurate. Period.
I'm Rams fan, not just a Bradford fan.
Go ahead, don't comprehend what I wrote and make assumptions that aren't true
I you need me I'll be in another thread sharing my positve energy about the team I love.
Good grief

 

[jrry32]

Wow. I thought this place was one where opinions could be shared?
I didn't discredit Bradford AT ALL in this thread.
No matter what stats you want to pull, Bradford w/l record hasn't been good. So to just assume wins on his behalf is not accurate. Period.
I'm Rams fan, not just a Bradford fan.
Go ahead, don't comprehend what I wrote and make assumptions that aren't true
I you need me I'll be in another thread sharing my positve energy about the team I love.
Good grief

Lets consider it logically, Dieter:
1. Is Bradford the better QB? If yes, go to Question 2.
2. Is the QB position an impact position in terms of wins and losses? If yes, go to Question 3.
3. Would the Rams win more games with Bradford?

I think all three answers are "yes". It's a simple logical approach. I don't see how you could conclude that the Rams would do worse with the better QB. And that's without ignoring all of the specific areas of play where Bradford outshines Davis and how the Rams have lost this year.

I don't think you're being very logical. Hell, even if you want to look purely at wins and losses(not a good measure of QB quality), Bradford is 8-12-1 over his last two season as a starter. Davis is 3-6 this year. And I don't think you'd make the argument that the 2012 and 2013 teams were as talented as this team.

While you may not have intended to discredit Bradford, it certainly has seemed like you are when you're arguing that the Rams wouldn't have performed better with him than a struggling backup QB.(just discussing perception, not making an accusation)

 

[dieterbrock]

Lets consider it logically, Dieter:
1. Is Bradford the better QB? If yes, go to Question 2.)

FAIL

That is not the point.

Bradford record as a starter 18-30 .375% WP
Back up QB's during Bradford Tenure 8-16 .333% WP
That equates to less than 1 game over the course of a 16 game season
So yes, I find it completely ridiculous that folks can just plug a win in here or there when over the course of his career, he hasnt made that difference compared to his back ups.

Sam is physically better than any QB that has worn a Rams uniform in a decade. I've NEVER denied that, and like everyone who pays attention, would LOVE to see that physical potential be reached, HERE in a Rams uniform.
And my original point was merely that its amazing how much better Bradford is getting merely by Davis getting worse.

 

[Alan]

LesBaker practicing his American Indian English:
Ugh

 

[dbrooks25]

FAIL

That is not the point.

Bradford record as a starter 18-30 .375% WP
Back up QB's during Bradford Tenure 8-16 .333% WP
That equates to less than 1 game over the course of a 16 game season
So yes, I find it completely ridiculous that folks can just plug a win in here or there when over the course of his career, he hasnt made that difference compared to his back ups.

Sam is physically better than any QB that has worn a Rams uniform in a decade. I've NEVER denied that, and like everyone who pays attention, would LOVE to see that physical potential be reached, HERE in a Rams uniform.
And my original point was merely that its amazing how much better Bradford is getting merely by Davis getting worse.

This guy...........

 

[ram007]

Fisher is not going with anybody other than Sam Bradford to start the 2015 season. Fisher's coaching career is over with another non-playoff season. Bradford gives this team the ONLY chance given the complexity of Schotty's offense to learn in one training season. Fisher will start Bradford on a small leash with either a first rounder or a QB traded to Rams as backup. YES, Bradford is back.

 

[Orchid]

Bradford's 7 Starts
PPG Allowed - 26.3 PPG

Davis's 9 Starts
PPG Allowed - 27.9 PPG

Jrry32,

Do you or any other members have defensive pts/game minus turnovers for points and special team scores?
Thanks
Orchid

 

[jrry32]

FAIL

That is not the point.

That's exactly the point. You can't even argue it. It's simple logical reasoning.

Bradford record as a starter 18-30 .375% WP
Back up QB's during Bradford Tenure 8-16 .333% WP
That equates to less than 1 game over the course of a 16 game season
So yes, I find it completely ridiculous that folks can just plug a win in here or there when over the course of his career, he hasnt made that difference compared to his back ups.

Sam is physically better than any QB that has worn a Rams uniform in a decade. I've NEVER denied that, and like everyone who pays attention, would LOVE to see that physical potential be reached, HERE in a Rams uniform.
And my original point was merely that its amazing how much better Bradford is getting merely by Davis getting worse.

Probably because those folks are capable of looking beyond the numbers at a situation in a logical sense rather than just choosing to ignore that to compare numbers that completely lack context.

Are we really going to argue that the Rams over the final 9 games in 2013 weren't a clearly better team than the Rams that played the first 7 games? The defense settled into the scheme and played much better. The offense actually had a ground game to rely on. It's context that you're conveniently ignoring. I'll even provide context:
Bradford's 7 Starts
PPG Allowed - 26.3 PPG

Clemens's 9 Starts
PPG Allowed - 20.0 PPG

That's almost a TD per game better.

Here's another big one:
Bradford's 7 Starts
70.6 RYPG, 3.19 RYPC, 0 RTDs

Clemens's 9 Starts
139.8 RYPG, 4.64 RYPC, 10 RTDs

That's 69.8 rushing yards per game, 1.45 yards per carry, and 1.1 rushing TDs per game more with Clemens as a starter than Bradford.

Did Bradford cause our defense to play 6.3 PPG worse? Did Bradford cause our running game to be average nearly 70 yards per game, 1.5 yards per carry, and 1 TD per game less? No.

So to compare records without any sort of context is nuts to me. We're Rams fans; we know what happened. Cite Bradford's record all you want to, this team would be 5-4 at worst with him at QB.

Bradford is getting better? Because of the belief that he'd play better than a guy that just got benched for Shaun Hill? You have to be kidding me.

 

[jrry32]

Jrry32,

Do you or any other members have defensive pts/game minus turnovers for points and special team scores?
Thanks
Orchid

It wouldn't be too hard to calculate but I just don't feel like taking the time right now.