This has been a bad football season

[Dodgersrf]

Yep, it blows.



How many games did we lose that we were competitive in late? This will blow your mind. This is what Hill and Davis did in 2014 in the 4th quarter in games we were either tied or trailing:
27/50
54%
309 yards
6.2 YPA
0 TDs
9 Ints
33.3 QB Rating

You read that right. When we were either tied or trailing by one score in the fourth quarter, our QBs threw 0 TDs to 9 Ints.

Sam Bradford in 2012 and 2013 combined when we were either tied or trailing in the 4th quarter:
56/92
60.9%
578 yards
6.3 YPA
4 TDs
2 Ints
84.4 QB Rating

That's where the difference would have been made. When the games were close late, Bradford would not have made the backbreaking mistakes that cost us games or have folded mentally.

Give me 3 Qbs that could have taken us to the promised land behind our beat up oline.

We would have won more games with Bradford, but we still wouldn't have made the playoffs.

I've read where Snead becomes obsessed with building positions in the draft.
If Snead isn't obsessed with building a solid oline this year I'll be beyond pissed.

Qb? Yes we need one.
Oline? We don't stand a chance without one.

 

[FRO]

Give me 3 Qbs that could have taken us to the promised land behind our beat up oline.

We would have won more games with Bradford, but we still wouldn't have made the playoffs.

I've read where Snead becomes obsessed with building positions in the draft.
If Snead isn't obsessed with building a solid oline this year I'll be beyond pissed.

Qb? Yes we need one.
Oline? We don't stand a chance without one.

I agree with you on the offensive line. I think it's a bigger need than QB. We can get a great QB, but if we can't protect him he won't do so well. Going against the great defenses we go against in this division we have to have a dominating line to compete.

 

[jrry32]

Give me 3 Qbs that could have taken us to the promised land behind our beat up oline.

We would have won more games with Bradford, but we still wouldn't have made the playoffs.

I've read where Snead becomes obsessed with building positions in the draft.
If Snead isn't obsessed with building a solid oline this year I'll be beyond pissed.

Qb? Yes we need one.
Oline? We don't stand a chance without one.

Rodgers, Brady, and Manning are three easy ones.

 

[BigRamFan]

Rodgers, Brady, and Manning are three easy ones.

Rogers? Maybe. Brady would be curled up in the fetal position on the sideline if he had to play without top notch OL protection and Manning would have had that "pulled quad" months earlier with his lack of mobility and constant A gap pressure. All, IMO, of course.

 

[jrry32]

Rogers? Maybe. Brady would be curled up in the fetal position on the sideline if he had to play without top notch OL protection and Manning would have had that "pulled quad" months earlier with his lack of mobility and constant A gap pressure. All, IMO, of course.

Nah. Those two guys, Manning and Brady, get the ball out significantly faster than our QBs did this year and are much better at calling protections and anticipating blitzes. I've seen Manning make some OLs lacking quite a bit of talent look good.

 

[BigRamFan]

Nah. Those two guys, Manning and Brady, get the ball out significantly faster than our QBs did this year and are much better at calling protections and anticipating blitzes. I've seen Manning make some OLs lacking quite a bit of talent look good.

No argument there, but you have also seen both he an Brady struggle mightily when pressured quickly up the middle (as do all QBs to some extent). I don't think either has ever played with an OL as porous up the middle as ours was this season.

 

[Dodgersrf]

Rodgers, Brady, and Manning are three easy ones.

Disagree.
Manning didn't play well with constant pressure.
See Brady against KC with constant presseure. Not good
Rodgers I doubt would fare much better.

Qbs had 2 seconds on average to get the ball out. Maybe less.

 

[OnceARam]

Not true all of us realize the difference Bradford would've made, however, you can't continue to count on somebody who has a history of durability issues. Now granted none of us thought he would miss an entire season, however, most of us felt the regime should of had a better plan in place than Shaun Hill.

This regime felt LeMarcus Joyner was more of a priority than maybe Jimmy Garoppolo for example. Now the regime is ready to have a better plan in place, but this is not a good year for Quarterbacks so once again the Rams could be on the outside looking in.

One thing for sure if the regime does not solve the quarterback issue they can only hope to continue to straddle the line of mediocrity at best so all of us hope for a healthy Sam Bradford, but let's just hope this regime understands about history and our quarterback scenario does not mirror trying to defeat Russia before winter.

Nice analogy.

 

[jrry32]

Disagree.
Manning didn't play well with constant pressure.
See Brady against KC with constant presseure. Not good
Rodgers I doubt would fare much better.

Qbs had 2 seconds on average to get the ball out. Maybe less.

No, they didn't. Here are the averages:
Manning - 2.22 seconds to attempt
Brady - 2.34 seconds to attempt
Hill - 2.43 seconds to attempt
Davis - 2.75 seconds to attempt

Manning - 2.93 seconds to sack
Brady - 2.92 seconds to sack
Hill - 2.89 seconds to sack
Davis - 3.54 seconds to sack

There's a reason Manning is consistently one of the least sacked QBs in the NFL. It's not because he has an elite OL every year.

Sorry guys but our team wasn't as bad as some of you guys are claiming. Our OL stunk but there are definitely QBs, including the ones I named, that could have made it work.

 

[jrry32]

No argument there, but you have also seen both he an Brady struggle mightily when pressured quickly up the middle (as do all QBs to some extent). I don't think either has ever played with an OL as porous up the middle as ours was this season.

Yes but keep in mind that our OL might have been better at picking up pressure with a guy like Brady or Manning calling protections. Plus, teams would have been most hesitant to blitz us.

 

[Dodgersrf]

No, they didn't. Here are the averages:
Manning - 2.22 seconds to attempt
Brady - 2.34 seconds to attempt
Hill - 2.43 seconds to attempt
Davis - 2.75 seconds to attempt

Manning - 2.93 seconds to sack
Brady - 2.92 seconds to sack
Hill - 2.89 seconds to sack
Davis - 3.54 seconds to sack

There's a reason Manning is consistently one of the least sacked QBs in the NFL. It's not because he has an elite OL every year.

Sorry guys but our team wasn't as bad as some of you guys are claiming. Our OL stunk but there are definitely QBs, including the ones I named, that could have made it work.

Running for your life for 1.5 seconds after the snap shouldn't count.
According to these stats, Manning and Brady played behind worse lines than Hill And Davis.
Which simply isn't true.

 

[jrry32]

Running for your life for 1.5 seconds after the snap shouldn't count.
According to these stats, Manning and Brady played behind worse lines than Hill And Davis.
Which simply isn't true.

No. That's not what they say.

They say that Manning and Brady got the ball out of their hands faster. And that the average time in which they were sacked was about the same as Hill(which means you typically were either sacking all three QBs quickly or they were getting the ball out before you did). But Hill was sacked more often.

Austin Davis is different because of his tendency to hold the ball and try to scramble. Which will skew the numbers. But I think all of us were cognizant of the fact that he was bad at getting the ball out quickly especially when pressured...which is why teams started blitzing the bejeezus out of him.

You're exaggerating how bad the OL was. They sucked. But we've had worse OLs. And frankly, as I said before, I have a feeling they would have looked much better with a Manning or Brady.

But the supposition that the best QBs in the NFL couldn't have gotten us to the playoffs in 2014 is just wrong imo. Our team is a lot better than it's being given credit for being.

 

[Dodgersrf]

No. That's not what they say.

They say that Manning and Brady got the ball out of their hands faster. And that the average time in which they were sacked was about the same as Hill(which means you typically were either sacking all three QBs quickly or they were getting the ball out before you did). But Hill was sacked more often.

Austin Davis is different because of his tendency to hold the ball and try to scramble. Which will skew the numbers. But I think all of us were cognizant of the fact that he was bad at getting the ball out quickly especially when pressured...which is why teams started blitzing the bejeezus out of him.

You're exaggerating how bad the OL was. They sucked. But we've had worse OLs. And frankly, as I said before, I have a feeling they would have looked much better with a Manning or Brady.

But the supposition that the best QBs in the NFL couldn't have gotten us to the playoffs in 2014 is just wrong imo. Our team is a lot better than it's being given credit for being.

This oline is very close to the bottom with even the poorest lines we've had.
The interior line play was atrocious, making a pocket non existent far to often.

I agree we would have won more with Manning or Brady. I'm just very doubtful either could have taken us to the playoffs this year. Even though they are light years ahead of what we had behind center this year.

The year is over and we will never know.

 

[jrry32]

This oline is very close to the bottom with even the poorest lines we've had.
The interior line play was atrocious, making a pocket non existent far to often.

I agree we would have won more with Manning or Brady. I'm just very doubtful either could have taken us to the playoffs this year. Even though they are light years ahead of what we had behind center this year.

The year is over and we will never know.

If the best QBs in the NFL couldn't have gotten us to the playoffs, we have a bad team. And that's pretty depressing.

This OL is not very close to the poorest OLs we have had of late. I'm sorry, man, but I just can't agree with that. This is probably the best OL we've had since 2006. And while, yes, that's more an indictment on the lack of OL talent on our roster since then...this is still a far cry from the OLs comprised of the Adam Goldbergs, Tony Wragges, Bryan Mattisons, Quinn Ojinnakas, etc. of the world.

 

[Dodgersrf]

If the best QBs in the NFL couldn't have gotten us to the playoffs, we have a bad team. And that's pretty depressing.

This OL is not very close to the poorest OLs we have had of late. I'm sorry, man, but I just can't agree with that. This is probably the best OL we've had since 2006. And while, yes, that's more an indictment on the lack of OL talent on our roster since then...this is still a far cry from the OLs comprised of the Adam Goldbergs, Tony Wragges, Bryan Mattisons, Quinn Ojinnakas, etc. of the world.

We started the season as a bad team. It wasn't until our defense began to play as advertised that we saved some respectability.
We finished with a bad offense and a good defense.
Until I see a pocket for a qb to stand in, we'll never reach our potential.
Comparing our current oline to lines we've had the past few years sets the bar pretty low. Yet were still far below average.
I doubt we will ever agree that our oline played well enough for us to win consistently.
You believe they did.
I believe they didnt.
There was hope before the injuries, because it looked like a good group on paper. Paper doesn't play football games.

 

[jrry32]

We started the season as a bad team. It wasn't until our defense began to play as advertised that we saved some respectability.

Yet we lost to Dallas and Philly by one score with the chance to win late. We had a chance to win late against Arizona but had our offense implode. We jumped on San Francisco only for our team to implode in the second half.

That's 4 games that could have gone the opposite direction. Not to mention the San Diego game, the second Arizona game, and the Seattle game which came in the second half of the year.

We finished with a bad offense and a good defense.
Until I see a pocket for a qb to stand in, we'll never reach our potential.

Agreed.

Comparing our current oline to lines we've had the past few years sets the bar pretty low. Yet were still far below average.

Agreed.

I doubt we will ever agree that our oline played well enough for us to win consistently.

Well, we do disagree. I think you can still win with a shaky OL under the right circumstances...but it takes one hell of a QB.

You believe they did.
I believe they didnt.
There was hope before the injuries, because it looked like a good group on paper. Paper doesn't play football games.

That's for damn sure. Bye bye to Long, Joseph, and Wells. You had nice careers but you're done...or damn close to it.