Another Bradford Article!

[-X-]

I'll validate you X.

 

[ED_29]

Well not "all" but some fer sure

This thread has gone pd? Why because I disagreed.... No one was called names, or their mother assaulted... We just disagree on Bradford and that's ok and doesn't make the discussion the PD

People disagree man c'mon

 

[ED_29]

Of those 4 wins, the defense won 2 as I recall.

See this is what I'm talking about... Regarding the last of consistency. In two of the games the defense won 2? Which two were those and please help me understand what happened to the "team" thing?

 

[ED_29]

We won 4 games with Clemens at QB,3 with Sam
and BTW with Clemens at QB we won ZERO "in the best division "

So yeah HUH?

So then with Sam who is 5-2-1 under Fisher in this division we can look forward to a 2012 type season in terms of Ram wins in the division and given even more improvement around him right?

You know that was the point right?

 

[Thordaddy]

This thread has gone pd? Why because I disagreed.... No one was called names, or their mother assaulted... We just disagree on Bradford and that's ok and doesn't make the discussion the PD

People disagree man c'mon

FWIW that's PD, but maybe we just disagree bout THAT

 

[moklerman]

See this is what I'm talking about... Regarding the last of consistency. In two of the games the defense won 2? Which two were those and please help me understand what happened to the "team" thing?

My guess would be the Indy and Chicago games. 8 forced turnovers and 400 yards rushing in just two games. Clemens was playing the role of Russell/Colin in those games. In fact, the last 8 games of the year he threw for less than 200 yards 6 times. He was barely a caretaker and unfortunately, he couldn't really handle that and started turning the ball over.

 

[Thordaddy]

So then with Sam who is 5-2-1 under Fisher in this division we can look forward to a 2012 type season in terms of Ram wins in the division and given even more improvement around him right?

You know that was the point right?

Just setting the math straight, not too worried about what THE POINT is, mainly cuz when people get too wrapped up in THE POINT is when things get strident


BTW I expect us to win 2 more game outside the division than we win inside.
i.e. we win 4 in the division we win 6 outside
so to go better than 8-8 gotta have a winning record in the division

 

[ED_29]

For your edification, I listened to it despite my finding Venturi to be a pandering buffoon - along with "Zach." Everything he said about the team is exactly what I said to you when I quoted you. So, I guess I got validated by a buffoon. Not sure how I feel about that. I'll have to meditate on that one. As for his criticisms about Bradford, I can accept those, even though he's contradicting himself as he offers them. He says the O-line can't protect the edge, the run game can't find the edge, and the defense HAS no edge. And then he goes on to say that Bradford doesn't wow him enough. Quite the dichotomy. lol. As far as Bradford not giving enough facial expressions as he leaves the field ... meh. That's not something that should be all that concerning to anyone.

Anyway. I've already given you my personal criticisms of Bradford in the past, so your claim that I'm blaming everyone but him rings hollow. A pure pocket passer needs the things that causes Venturi to criticize him. Do you not see the dilemma there? Bradford is at his very best when he has time to plant his foot and step into a throw. Well, yeah. But when you just get done telling "Zach and Rammer" that the offense isn't giving him the opportunity to do it, how can you criticize it for not happening? I disagree strongly that he lacks football instincts, but I have no way of proving he does. Nor does Venturi have a way of proving he doesn't. I just got done watching his two worst games from last year, and I saw him stand tall in the pocket despite being sacked 11 times, hit 31 times, and pressured far more than that over that two-game span. I also saw him deliver strikes as he was being hit, receivers dropping balls, backs missing blocking assignments, and some pretty crappy throws as well.

In order to intelligently debate Venturi, I started to compile a video with his audio from that interview while showing plays that contradict everything he was saying. And then I came to my senses. I figured, what's the point anymore? His critics aren't changing their minds. He'll have to be an active participant on a team with one unified purpose. Playing together, and executing across the board on their way to picking up a bunch of wins. If they can't do that, someone's gonna get the blame, and it'll most likely be him. If they DO do that, then there won't be much complaining about anything.

So ... we'll see what happens. Only 97 more days.

Well I validated what you said as well. In your original response you cited all the reasons the offense didn't work but point blank said that you weren't about to blame the QB. I only provided an opposing view of that take. And this person was a professional coach. I'm also sure you didn't miss his comments on elevating players as well? (Wink)

Re: you blaming everyone but the QB, this is a direct quote from you:

http://www.ramsondemand.com/threads/another-bradford-article.26323/page-6
But I'm in no way going to blame the QB for the failure of that offense

Now to me it sounds like you eliminating Bradford from any consideration in the offenses ability to run efficiently. I myself have been clear that there were multiple factors. Bradford being among them. Also when I listen to Venturi he clearly expected more from Sam. He even mentions his performance in comparison of Luck and their ability to deal with adversity, showing leadership, and making plays even when things are breaking down. He simply has expected more of him and so have I.

Yep 97 days to go... I suspect after the 4th of July we will nearly be coming out of our skin anticipating what our team will look like.

 

[moklerman]

Count me as someone else who doesn't put a lot of stock into what Venturi says.

 

[ED_29]

FWIW that's PD, but maybe we just disagree bout THAT

Yes we disagree me saying c'mon is not pd.... Me saying c'mon is like me saying well c'mon lol

Obviously name calling is unnecessary and neither Deiter or I have come close to doing that. Someone else did that to me though. Not sure if it was removed. I simply reported it as inappropriate and moved on.

Anyhow we are good ThorD.... Even if we don't agree and that was really my point

 

[ED_29]

Count me as someone else who doesn't put a lot of stock into what Venturi says.

That's fine but since he was a coach in the NFL I think I'm going to go with him

 

[-X-]

Re: you blaming everyone but the QB, this is a direct quote from you:

http://www.ramsondemand.com/threads/another-bradford-article.26323/page-6
But I'm in no way going to blame the QB for the failure of that offense

Right. And? I'm in no way going to BLAME the QB for the FAILURE of that offense. In other words, it was an offense that required many moving parts to execute properly and not all of them were, so why would I blame one guy? So read it again. I'm not going to BLAME the QB for the FAILURE of that offense. And neither did Venturi. Just because I don't go out of my way to openly criticize Bradford in every post that intends to put the blame on him solely, doesn't mean I'm absolving him of everything either. I should only have to explain my problem with him once or twice at most. What I shouldn't have to do is use my critiques of him as a permanent disclaimer or qualifier in every post that talks about him (i.e., he's good at that, BUT....)

 

[ED_29]

My guess would be the Indy and Chicago games. 8 forced turnovers and 400 yards rushing in just two games. Clemens was playing the role of Russell/Colin in those games. In fact, the last 8 games of the year he threw for less than 200 yards 6 times. He was barely a caretaker and unfortunately, he couldn't really handle that and started turning the ball over.

And that's my point.... While he played better than I thought he would.... He can't really play

So if the Rams can win 7 wins with Clemens they need to be in the 10 or 11 range at least with Bradford

Bradford was playing the role of Wilson/Kap against after game 4... And in wins over the horrible Jags, and Texans. With a ton of TOs from the defense in both wins and defensive tds too

 

[-X-]

So if the Rams can win 7 wins with Clemens they need to be in the 10 or 11 range at least with Bradford

Why do you keep saying we won 7 games with Clemens?

 

[ED_29]

Just setting the math straight, not too worried about what THE POINT is, mainly cuz when people get too wrapped up in THE POINT is when things get strident


BTW I expect us to win 2 more game outside the division than we win inside.
i.e. we win 4 in the division we win 6 outside
so to go better than 8-8 gotta have a winning record in the division

I don't know what to expect. I know what I want to see.... At the very least a split in the division and like you at least two additional wins outside (although I would love to see more)

Keep in mind that with a little better play from Clemens at home against the Hawks and Titans that's two wins right there. Still mad about that Hawks loss at home.

Shaun Hill is an upgrade from Clemens and by a bunch. Had the Rams invested in that kind of backup last year.... I'm betting they beat the Hawks, Titans, and take one of those road games against the 49ers, or Cards.

Clemens inability to throw accurately and back those defenses off Stacy just killed the Rams

 

[ED_29]

Why do you keep saying we won 7 games with Clemens?

What do you want me to say?

 

[moklerman]

And that's my point.... While he played better than I thought he would.... He can't really play

So if the Rams can win 7 wins with Clemens they need to be in the 10 or 11 range at least with Bradford

Bradford was playing the role of Wilson/Kap against after game 4... And in wins over the horrible Jags, and Texans. With a ton of TOs from the defense in both wins and defensive tds too

Well, they didn't win 7 games with Clemens so that isn't really a valid point.

And weren't the Texans one of the top rated defenses going into that game? Their final record was obviously bad but they were playoff favorites the first half of the year.

Plus, Bradford wasn't exactly handing the ball off and just watching. He had 6TD/0INT in those two games. Which is what I think Fisher wants. Just like SF and SEA have established. High quality passes instead of high quantity passes.

 

[-X-]

What do you want me to say?

That we won 4 with Clemens.

 

[moklerman]

That's fine but since he was a coach in the NFL I think I'm going to go with him

So was Rich Kotite. Do you take his word as gospel too?