1. 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.

Wagoner On Bradford

Discussion in 'RAMS - NFL TALK' started by -X-, Jan 25, 2014.

  1. -X- Not into the whole brevity thing.

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,787
    Likes Received:
    8,659
    No, I know. I mean, if those pass plays that were negated had been tacked onto his completion total, it would certainly raise the percentage.
    And since we had our fair share (and then some) of drive killing penalties, you can further *speculate* that he'd be in more manageable passing situations too.
     
    #61
    2 people like this.
  2. jjab360 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,070
    Likes Received:
    1,974
    Why would I compare? Why not? NFL players get compared to other NFL players all the time. Rankings and ratings systems are nothing but extended comparisons. Everything is relative. It's as basic as basic gets.

    I just called Bradford's accuracy amazing and pinpoint so your theory has been disproven. I'm not the only one who thinks this and if you watch X's video of Bradford's worst season, you can see where he fit a number of balls into unbelievably tight windows only to have them bounce right off the receivers' hands. He doesn't take that many chances but when he does our inexperienced receivers don't rise to the occasion often enough. If they did, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
     
    #62
  3. LesBaker Mr. Savant

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,047
    Likes Received:
    2,438
    You can't put a football player in a vacuum X.
     
    #63
  4. flv 

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,388
    Likes Received:
    1,027
    Agreed. Bradford could have looked noticeably better, but even with better stats I still think we'd have been 3-4. It's where we were as a team.
     
    #64
  5. -X- Not into the whole brevity thing.

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,787
    Likes Received:
    8,659
    Yeah, probably. Though, that TD that was negated due to a tripping call (against CAR) that would have given us the early lead, was a deflater.
     
    #65
  6. OnceARam Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,181
    Likes Received:
    360
    I'd agree that Bradford has a distrust in his receivers. But here's the REAL question;
    1) Is it Bradford's responsibility, as the starting QB, to have trust in his receivers regardless of how good they are? And do other, winning, QB's trust their receivers regardless of how good they are?
     
    #66
  7. -X- Not into the whole brevity thing.

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,787
    Likes Received:
    8,659
    I don't think he unilaterally distrusts his receivers. Every QB will shy away from one and favor another though when the payoff is better. And Bradford's ball distribution is pretty much on pace with most of the good QBs in the league, so I don't see any disturbing trends. I do remember him avoiding Steve Smith and Sims-Walker like the plague after they started off running bad routes and dropping passes.
     
    #67
  8. OnceARam Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,181
    Likes Received:
    360
    But he does play favorites. When Amendola was around he would hardly look at other receivers. Then when Amendola would get hurt, Bradford's game would go down hill.

    Look maybe we just need a #1 receiver and he would play well. I don't know.
     
    #68
  9. moklerman Warner-phile

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,924
    Likes Received:
    720
    That implies that he is keeping the ball from others who are deserving. Which has often been disproved. He has often zeroed in on his receivers that consistently get open and catch the ball and stayed away from those who proved unable to do either or both of those things. I don't really see anything wrong with that.
     
    #69
  10. -X- Not into the whole brevity thing.

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,787
    Likes Received:
    8,659
    Sure he plays favorites. Lotta QBs do that. Brady used to target Welker all the time, Stafford & Johnson, Cutler & Marshall (before Jeffery), and so on. But if you look at who he was targeting in 2013, it was all over the place. QBs go to the primary read first, and if that guy's open, he's gonna go to him 9 times out of 10 unless that guy's a decoy on a particular play.
     
    #70
  11. OnceARam Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,181
    Likes Received:
    360
    Yes, but the issue with the way Bradford has played favorites in the past is that he gets thrown when his favorite gets hurt. We saw that with several of his favorites, like Amendola and that older WR who had a great five game stretch who blew out his knee (forgetting his name). And I agree that those other QB you mentioned do play favorites, but they are also able to adjust. When Johnson is doubled, Stafford goes somewhere else. Cutler throws to Jeffery as well as Cutler. And, clearly, Brady adjusts to who ever is suited up. Brees and Rodgers don't care who they're throwing to. Same with Flacco - he was throwing to rookies and backups all season.

    Ryan had problems this season... What's my point? I lost it a long time ago. I just hope Bradford, assuming he's still our starter, comes back from injury with a different mindset. I hope he comes back thinking that this could be it. That he has nothing to lose. That he doesn't have to be perfect.
     
    #71
  12. OnceARam Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,181
    Likes Received:
    360
    Good point. But there is a developmental aspect to keep in mind as well. Also, the defense is aware of the phenomena that you are pointing out.

    Other QB's are able to play with inferior talent. Shouldn't Bradford be able to as well?
     
    #72
  13. -X- Not into the whole brevity thing.

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,787
    Likes Received:
    8,659
    On that we could agree.
     
    #73
    2 people like this.
  14. moklerman Warner-phile

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,924
    Likes Received:
    720
    I think clarification of that statement has to be established before I say yes or no. The problem in analyzing Bradford is that there really hasn't been a constant in any facet of his circumstances. Multiple HC's, OC's, systems, o-line, receivers, rb's...that he's as productive as he's been is basically praise-worthy in itself.
     
    #74
  15. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,799
    Likes Received:
    3,425
    You'd have to look at each of the other "winning QBs" individually. It may not be Bradford's responsibility to trust his receivers but it is his responsibility to not throw a ball into coverage when he sees his receiver is not going to be there and the pass is going to be an open pick.

    The idea that Bradford locked onto Danny is also a fallacy if I recall right. You'd have to go back and look at his distribution as it relates to targets. But as I recall, he had many games where he hit 6-8 different receivers. There is a big difference between a receiver being a main target and a QBs safety valve and a QB locking on to one receiver. In fact many of Danny's catches came because he was the check down or he came back toward Sam when he was in trouble.

    And if you watch other QBs they do generally have one or two receivers they look to more than the others - especially in key situations. But if you look at percentage of targets, I would bet that Sam targets the top five or six receivers on the team (including RBs and TEs) about the same percentage of the time as Manning for example.
     
    #75
  16. WillardRam New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2
    Good day folks. First post. I think Bradford has the goods but folks are maddenned but the success of guys like Wilson and Kapernick and wonder why Sam has not stepped up with more tie in the league? Very valid question.
     
    #76
  17. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,799
    Likes Received:
    3,425
    Bulger? Is that you? :heh: Sorry. Saw your first name and had to. Welcome aboard man.
     
    #77
  18. Which QBs?

    If they are better QBs, like Brady, nobody is comparing Bradford to the top QBs. Otherwise, curious who you have in mind?

    Few QBs could have played with WRs as bad as Bradford had in the first three years, and guessing the few that did, probably didn't set the league on fire. We should also factor in how bad the OLs were in his first three years.
     
    #78
  19. rams24/7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,339
    Likes Received:
    571
    I guess I don't quite get what people want from Sam. He manages turnovers well, so in turn there will be THINGS (stats) that he does that contribute to the TD-INT ratio. Like:

    -You seldom see Sam forcing a throw, throwing across his body, etc.
    1. In turn he may take a few extra sacks, but he limits the damage.
    2. Sam will often throw the ball away instead of taking a sack OR forcing a throw.

    I've heard analysts in the past say when Sam takes a sack (instead of forcing a bad throw): "Well he's gotta get the ball out faster." I've also heard them say when he throws the ball away (instead of forcing a bad throw): "Well you gotta give your WR a CHANCE to catch it." You can't have it both ways. Sam will never be the 15+ INT QB. He probably won't be the 5,000 yd or 40 TD QB, but I'll take a game manager like Alex Smith any day of the week. Not to say I'd take Smith over Manning, but I have no problem with having a QB who limits turnovers.

    And I think you do have to factor in the offensive lines & WRing corps Sam has worked with in his years in STL. I'd say poor WR play & bad OL play have played a larger role in Sam's career 58.6 completion %. You take his #1 WRs in any year and they all missed extended periods of time. Losing a #1 target is not a little sob story I'm trying to bang the drum on for Sam, it's an issue for any QB. Look at how Luck's play and INDY's play took a nosedive this year following the loss of Reggie Wayne. How about the Pats having to play what seemed like half of their games down to the wire this year because they were missing Hernandez & Gronk? This happened to Sam more than once.
    1. Mark Clayton: healthy for 4 FULL games as a Ram.....22 catches for 300 yards and 2 TDs. Tore his PCL in week 5 of 2010.
    2. Danny Amendola: healthy for 1 FULL season (2010).....85 catches for 689 yards and 3 TDs. Dislocated elbow, played 1 game in 2011. 2012 was healthy for 11 and was effective when he played....63 catches for 666 yards and 3 TDs.
    3. Danario Alexander: Played in 18 out of 32 possible games for the Rams. Had 46 catches for 737 yards and 3 TDs (mind you he only STARTED 7 out of those 18 games)

    I think you also saw Sam improve this year because minus games 3 & 4, he was hit much less; something you can't say about 2010-2012. He was the most hit QB in 2011 (not surprisingly he limped through that year). A bad OL will make the ball come out before a QB wants to. Not to mention drops WERE a serious issue. I hate when people downplay them like they aren't a factor. Just take a look through his game logs. How is a guy who 9 times in 16 games (2012) that frequently "accurate" if he's an inaccurate QB? The games where he's below 50% are more frequently examples of the inconsistent WR play than Sam's "inaccuracy." Take the AZ game for example where Sam started 5 of 7 and ended up 7 of 21 in the game. Its hard to get into a rhythm throwing the ball when you're going 3 and out or 6 and out because someone is dropping balls on 2nd or 3rd down that would extend drives.

    Idk. Imo Sam is a QB w/63+ cp.% ability that CAN throw for 4500+ yards and 25+ TDs. I'd be shocked if he ever threw over 15 picks, unless we turn into the GSOT2 and are launching bombs downfield every game. And on that note, I think Sam has shown he CAN throw DEEP and ACCURATELY, so I think he CAN raise his yards per attempt if we can get enough protection for him as TA, Givens, and Cookie get downfield this fall.

    Sorry for the long response. Just my opinion, not ALL of this is directed at you, but just making my case on your accuracy & yards per attempt statements.

    Here's my guess for Sam in 2014:

    4,300...29 TDs...65%
     
    #79
  20. rams24/7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,339
    Likes Received:
    571
    You can't compare Sam with either QBs because Wilson and Kaepernick were dropped into playoff/Super Bowl caliber teams the first year they started. Same goes for Flacco & Sanchez. All 4 QBs are examples of guys who were the LAST piece of the puzzle for their teams that were already very good, especially defensively. I'd say I'm more impressed with Andrew Luck compared to Kaep or Wilson after 2 years because he has had to CREATE more of the wins for his team. Kaep and Wilson just get to hand the ball off 25-30 times a game, not have any turnovers, throw a TD or 2 or none, and get the ball back from their Ds. Can you imagine if Sam had a D that could SEAL games? We would have beaten DET in 2012 & we would have BEAT (not tied) SF in 2012.

    Sam and Cam Newton are closer to the same boat as far as the situation they came into. Both basically came into team that were going through FULL rebuilding minus a FEW key players. They HELPED their teams, but they weren't the ONLY missing piece to the puzzle. And that's why it took Cam 3 years. I think a healthy Sam will have a very good chance with an improved D and O to make the playoffs in 2014
     
    #80