Davis

[RamFan503]

Davis IS a third year player. Are we not considering Brian Quick a third year player?

Quick has been playing in real games since he came into the league. Do I consider BQ's three years to be vastly different than Davis' - absolutely without question. You compare Davis' three years with (1) first round draft pick Aaron Rodgers playing behind HOF QB Brett Favre? (2) Fourth overall pick Rivers playing behind Breese - who was having a Probowl year? Was there any question that Rodgers and Rivers were going to be given EVERY opportunity to warrant that 1st round pick? Are you saying Davis could even dream of having those opportunities? Are you really saying Davis' three years is in the same galaxy a those two? A player who was on the Dolphins practice squad last year before being signed as back-up half way through the season? A player who was inactive his entire rookie year?

What we are really talking about here is an UDFA getting an opportunity that he has NEVER had at this level. Is he even close to Rivers or Rodgers? Of course not. But seriously? Saying his first three years should be considered in the same breath as those two?

I brought up Foles because he is in his third year - second as a starter - and Davis is outplaying him in spite of far fewer opportunities and real game time looks at how defenses play the game, the speed of the game, and EVERYTHING about real game play that doesn't even compare to practice reps with the third string wearing a red "no hit" jersey, and watching games from the sideline in street clothes or on a different team . I'm also guessing it wouldn't be all THAT difficult to find other QBs with more game experience being outplayed by Davis. I only picked Foles because Davis clearly outplayed him head to head even considering the costly mistakes.

I'm not saying AD is the future but trying to compare him the way you did makes no sense and there is absolutely no way his time in the NFL is remotely comparable. Davis could very well grow as a QB. I hold out hope but still have my eyes open to his obvious deficiencies at this point in his career.

I think we would be irresponsible to think we are set at QB at this point and fully expect us to take a QB early in next year's draft. But then I argued last year that we should take an early round QB as it would be both an investment AND insurance. A year later, we are still in that same position.

 

[jrry32]

Quick has been playing in real games since he came into the league. Do I consider BQ's three years to be vastly different than Davis' - absolutely without question. You compare Davis' three years with (1) first round draft pick Aaron Rodgers playing behind HOF QB Brett Favre? (2) Fourth overall pick Rivers playing behind Breese - who was having a Probowl year? Was there any question that Rodgers and Rivers were going to be given EVERY opportunity to warrant that 1st round pick? Are you saying Davis could even dream of having those opportunities? Are you really saying Davis' three years is in the same galaxy a those two? A player who was on the Dolphins practice squad last year before being signed as back-up half way through the season? A player who was inactive his entire rookie year?

What we are really talking about here is an UDFA getting an opportunity that he has NEVER had at this level. Is he even close to Rivers or Rodgers? Of course not. But seriously? Saying his first three years should be considered in the same breath as those two?

I brought up Foles because he is in his third year - second as a starter - and Davis is outplaying him in spite of far fewer opportunities and real game time looks at how defenses play the game, the speed of the game, and EVERYTHING about real game play that doesn't even compare to practice reps with the third string wearing a red "no hit" jersey, and watching games from the sideline in street clothes or on a different team . I'm also guessing it wouldn't be all THAT difficult to find other QBs with more game experience being outplayed by Davis. I only picked Foles because Davis clearly outplayed him head to head even considering the costly mistakes.

I'm not saying AD is the future but trying to compare him the way you did makes no sense and there is absolutely no way his time in the NFL is remotely comparable. Davis could very well grow as a QB. I hold out hope but still have my eyes open to his obvious deficiencies at this point in his career.

I think we would be irresponsible to think we are set at QB at this point and fully expect us to take a QB early in next year's draft. But then I argued last year that we should take an early round QB as it would be both an investment AND insurance. A year later, we are still in that same position.

I have just about said my piece on Davis. Brian Quick barely played. He used those two years to learn the system, improve his technique, and become a more confident player.(along with many other things) I don't care if their situations aren't perfectly parallel. The point being made is that those two years that Davis had before this one were not wasted. He wasn't in college. He wasn't on the street. He wasn't napping in the locker-room.

He had an opportunity to learn and master our system mentally, better himself technically and mentally, and play with the guys on the team.

He is a third year pro. He is not a third year starter. But people here are too quick to ignore the advantages of those 2 years. He's not your typical first year starter. Your typical first year starters does not know the system like Davis does, has not had the time to iron out technical deficiencies with a NFL coach, has not had the film practice and work to know how to prepare at a NFL level like Davis has, and does not have the time in with the players on this team that Davis does.

Davis COULD grow as a QB but he hasn't. I keyed in on certain issues early on with him and said that he needs to improve on those issues or else defenses will adapt to him. He hasn't improved. San Francisco adapted and exposed him. We can't afford more games like that. I want the QB in that gives us the better chance of winning. If Davis can't adapt, he's a liability. And thus far, he hasn't adapted.

That frustrates me. This isn't a guy trying to fix mechanical issues, learn the system, get timing down, and be our starting QB all on the fly. He's much more prepared than your average first year starter. He's still a first year starter. Inconsistency and mistakes are acceptable. I've been patient with those. What is not acceptable to me is Davis just not improving. And right now, he's not. I saw what looked like improvement against Seattle but he's gone completely backwards since then.

 

[mr.stlouis]

Quick has been playing in real games since he came into the league. Do I consider BQ's three years to be vastly different than Davis' - absolutely without question. You compare Davis' three years with (1) first round draft pick Aaron Rodgers playing behind HOF QB Brett Favre? (2) Fourth overall pick Rivers playing behind Breese - who was having a Probowl year? Was there any question that Rodgers and Rivers were going to be given EVERY opportunity to warrant that 1st round pick? Are you saying Davis could even dream of having those opportunities? Are you really saying Davis' three years is in the same galaxy a those two? A player who was on the Dolphins practice squad last year before being signed as back-up half way through the season? A player who was inactive his entire rookie year?

What we are really talking about here is an UDFA getting an opportunity that he has NEVER had at this level. Is he even close to Rivers or Rodgers? Of course not. But seriously? Saying his first three years should be considered in the same breath as those two?

I brought up Foles because he is in his third year - second as a starter - and Davis is outplaying him in spite of far fewer opportunities and real game time looks at how defenses play the game, the speed of the game, and EVERYTHING about real game play that doesn't even compare to practice reps with the third string wearing a red "no hit" jersey, and watching games from the sideline in street clothes or on a different team . I'm also guessing it wouldn't be all THAT difficult to find other QBs with more game experience being outplayed by Davis. I only picked Foles because Davis clearly outplayed him head to head even considering the costly mistakes.

I'm not saying AD is the future but trying to compare him the way you did makes no sense and there is absolutely no way his time in the NFL is remotely comparable. Davis could very well grow as a QB. I hold out hope but still have my eyes open to his obvious deficiencies at this point in his career.

I think we would be irresponsible to think we are set at QB at this point and fully expect us to take a QB early in next year's draft. But then I argued last year that we should take an early round QB as it would be both an investment AND insurance. A year later, we are still in that same position.

The beauty of it is I do think we could give the house for a QB and be alright. We have our young core players on both sides of the ball but just need a QB. I still want Sam but we cannot trust he'll stay healthy, been there.

Like Jake to GRob, Bradford will buy us time to groom before the inevitable happens.

Manziel trade, anybody? Cleveland is all ears, I'm sure.

 

[HometownBoy]

So Davis was just napping the last two years in St. Louis? There's a lot of bullcrap being flung in this thread to make excuses for the guy. I've had about enough of it.

Calling my argument dishonest because you don't agree with it is bullcrap.

Yes, I think something happened with a third string QB. I think a lot of something happened with a third string QB. The Rams didn't have Austin Davis sit in the locker-room and play tetris all day.

I'm not implying that Davis is on their level. I hate that implication bullcrap. Unless I explicitly tell you something, don't assume I'm saying something. The simple point I was making is that time spent on the bench is NOT lost time. There is plenty gained from it. Whether you are the QB of the future or the third string QB.



It is something great. It is a HUGE advantage over a real rookie QB.

No, I'm acting like this is Davis's third year in the NFL. That is a fact. That is two years of working with NFL coaches, working with NFL players, and working with his NFL system before this year. It means something. It means a lot of something. If you can't see that, you're wasting my time.

I see your point. I've never denied your point(that he's a first year starter). I've given your point credence. So stop wasting my time by calling my argument dishonest. It's not in the least. It's pointing out a key factor that you're all too ready to ignore.

If he spent those three years not taking advantage of the resources available to him because he was "questioning if he'd even be in the league", my opinion of him would fall quite substantially.

It was dishonest, sorry Jrr, but when you compare the coaching of two first rounders to an undrafted pick up as if it's a legitimate comparison that's dishonest. I can tell you're getting heated, because you're taking this as a slight at you and not just the argument. A step back to recollect is a good idea.

Nobody is saying he was asleep, but what everybody is saying is that the experience he got isn't near the experience you think it is and that he's limited in his progress because of it since his experience is again, rudimentary. You can say we're trying to make excuses for him and say that he was taking it easy in the back until you're blue in the face, that won't change what we really mean. That his experience was limited and rudimentary and that hurt him a lot in terms of how he plays on a day to day basis. Nobody's saying he's not got a huge advantage over a rookie, that's great. It's not hard to have more of an advantage than somebody with NO experience at all. However just because he has some experience doesn't mean it's all that great. Taking a cooking class or two makes me a better cook than somebody who doesn't know how to cook at all, but it doesn't make me a gourmet chef by proxy.

You say that he's not on their level, yet you continue to insist that because he's not progressing like them that he's done. You keep saying you understand, but then you keep tossing it aside to say that he should hurdle over it like it's some easy thing to circumvent.

Two years working with coaches as a 3rd stringer, with time on the practice squad and on the street thrown in, with his only experience being preseason action and film, tell me Jrry, without comparing him to rookies how good would you say this experience really is for preparing him for the day to day basis of being a starter? Especially in the face that actual NFL stars say that even though you got some film in you, as you put it's great, but it's not enough.

Lets not beat around that, they said it's good and helps, but it is not enough to prepare somebody for the actual NFL. So saying, but he got like 2 years of looking at film and coaching ISN'T scratching the surface, by them, the people actually playing the game's own admission.

And in terms of actual NFL experience he has 8 whole games worth, not enough to say he's a done deal by any stretch of the imagination or that he was exposed.

 

[rfip the second]

It's clear he is not the answer.

He played horrendous yesterday. The fact that we won yesterday in SF speaks to how good the defense/d line is finally starting to play.

Heard Wilbon say today, on PTI, "if the rams had their QB they'd be 5-3". I really hope they find their guy going into next year. Starting to become clear that AD won't be it.

 

[LesBaker]

I'd strongly consider it. I think if you don't give Hill the start, you still prepare yourself and him for a quick hook if Davis comes out and looks really bad. Davis has to show something this week.

I don't mind having this discussion but can you tell me what your expectations were when Davis stepped in and what they are now?

OK that said I think a quick hook is a very bad idea. Davis is completing 64% of his passes for 7 YPA including two bad games. If he struggles early next week against one of the top 5 defenses in the league you want to pull him and insert Hill? Davis has been playing against excellent defenses, Dallas, SF twice, KC are all top 10. AZ is 13th, PHI is 17th, Tampa is a bottom feeder.

KC allows the fewest passing yards per game in the NFL. SF is third. Seattle is 6th. Dallas AZ is 32nd and they are tied for second fewest sacks with 8. This could be a "get well game" for Davis. No way I pull the plug if the first two series or so don't go well. AZ has allowed the 5th fewest points in the NFL this year so if the Rams aren't winning it could likely be more than Davis.

They have a weakness against the pass..........let Davis go to work.

 

[jrry32]

I don't mind having this discussion but can you tell me what your expectations were when Davis stepped in and what they are now?

Very low. But he stepped in due to an injury. Now, they're higher. He has to be a better option than Hill. Hill is healthy now.

OK that said I think a quick hook is a very bad idea. Davis is completing 64% of his passes for 7 YPA including two bad games. If he struggles early next week against one of the top 5 defenses in the league you want to pull him and insert Hill? Davis has been playing against excellent defenses, Dallas, SF twice, KC are all top 10. AZ is 13th, PHI is 17th, Tampa is a bottom feeder.

KC allows the fewest passing yards per game in the NFL. SF is third. Seattle is 6th. Dallas AZ is 32nd and they are tied for second fewest sacks with 8. This could be a "get well game" for Davis. No way I pull the plug if the first two series or so don't go well. AZ has allowed the 5th fewest points in the NFL this year so if the Rams aren't winning it could likely be more than Davis.

They have a weakness against the pass..........let Davis go to work.

I don't think it is. Davis usually does his best work at the start of games.

@HometownBoy I have no interest in discussing this further with you. When you accuse someone of being dishonest or disingenuous, you better be damn sure they are. Because it's a very disrespectful way to discuss a difference of opinion. I hate to break it to you but Davis being a third year player is a FACT. It's not dishonest. It's not disingenuous. It is an irrefutable fact. You might not like the implications that YOU ASSUMED were behind it but there is nothing dishonest about it. Since you can't be respectful, I'm not going to spend more time discussing it with you. Because eventually, I'm going to slip up and say something that breaks the rules.

 

[RamFan503]

So Davis was just napping the last two years in St. Louis? There's a lot of bullcrap being flung in this thread to make excuses for the guy. I've had about enough of it.

Come on Jrry. Napping? Is that what people are saying? Or are they saying he didn't dress for a single game in 2012, as well as half the season in 2013 (not even with our team the first half) and got no where near the time with coaches and starting level players that the two QBs YOU brought up? Saying you've had about enough of it is a little weak too. I really don't see that many excuses for the guy except that many of us don't agree with you that his three years in the NFL gave him anywhere near the level of experience enjoyed by those dressing with the ones and twos and getting real face time with the coaches in a league where practice time has been cut so short that even #2s get painfully little real work.

I'm not implying that Davis is on their level. I hate that implication bullcrap.

Who brought them up? Implication bullshit? Really? Did/Do you really think anyone would take your using Rodgers and Rivers as anything other than a comparison or justification for your experience argument?

No, I'm acting like this is Davis's third year in the NFL. That is a fact. That is two years of working with NFL coaches, working with NFL players, and working with his NFL system before this year. It means something. It means a lot of something. If you can't see that, you're wasting my time.

Again. REALLY? Please don't do this. For one reason, "If you can't see that, you're wasting my time" as it relates to something you think is right versus another poster is akin to "If you don't know that, you don't know football". You really think someone calling your argument disingenuous is worse than your methodology here?

So stop wasting my time by calling my argument dishonest. It's not in the least. It's pointing out a key factor that you're all too ready to ignore.

First off - dishonest is not a straight line definition of disingenuous. Disingenuous often refers to an argument used that purposely overlooks substantial facts. I can easily see how someone would come to the conclusion that your comparing Davis' three years worth of experience to those of Quick, Rodgers, and Rivers is disingenuous due to the disparities in real NFL experience between all above.

Second, you say he (Hometownboy) is "wasting your time" by calling your argument dishonest [disingenuous] yet he is "all too ready to ignore" things you consider key factors. Is not buying into the argument that he has 2 1/2 years of NFL experience actually ignoring key factors?

He's not 8 games into his career. He's two and a half seasons with 8 games of starting experience into his NFL career.

I'm honestly blown away by your stubbornness to stick to this line of thought. I can get with the idea that you think he should be playing better given his experience and not being a true rookie. But the guy has started 7 games after being the third string QB. In 2012, he did not dress for a single game. I don't see anyone saying that time was useless as you seem to be indicating. But to give it even close to the same weight as someone being primed to be your starter IMO comes off as being disingenuous because I KNOW you study this game and you KNOW there is a huge difference. You can't seriously deny that - can you? Also, last year Davis wasn't even with the Rams for the first half of the season - practice squad or otherwise.

Brian Quick barely played his first two years. It absolutely gains a player a lot.

Quick played in 13 games his rookie year (not many snaps per game though - I think he averaged 8 snaps per game) and had the second most snaps of any Rams receiver last year IIRR. He was learning against NFL starters in real game situations with real contact. He was learning how to block and get off jams and various other lessons that you can't really believe is close to the same as being in the film room, playing against third stringers, and practicing while wearing a red jersey. I can't see where Quick's first two years came close to mirroring Davis'.

I'm honestly a little surprised by your pattern here. It seems fairly out of character.

 

[Lesson]

Still to early to make a judgement on Davis, IMO. It's clear yesterday wasn't a good game performance by him. However, he's done more good than bad since starting in Week 2. If he ends up showing that he's nothing more than a decent QB, I'm fine with that. As long as the Rams have a gameplan on what they're doing at QB next season, whether it be with Davis, Bradford, or a 1st rounder, after the end of the season I'll be happy.

 

[rfip the second]

I don't mind having this discussion but can you tell me what your expectations were when Davis stepped in and what they are now?

OK that said I think a quick hook is a very bad idea. Davis is completing 64% of his passes for 7 YPA including two bad games. If he struggles early next week against one of the top 5 defenses in the league you want to pull him and insert Hill? Davis has been playing against excellent defenses, Dallas, SF twice, KC are all top 10. AZ is 13th, PHI is 17th, Tampa is a bottom feeder.

KC allows the fewest passing yards per game in the NFL. SF is third. Seattle is 6th. Dallas AZ is 32nd and they are tied for second fewest sacks with 8. This could be a "get well game" for Davis. No way I pull the plug if the first two series or so don't go well. AZ has allowed the 5th fewest points in the NFL this year so if the Rams aren't winning it could likely be more than Davis.

They have a weakness against the pass..........let Davis go to work.

Dallas is an excellent defense? They are as bad as they were last year. Look at the numbers. Their offense has just protected more than they did last year.

Davis is doing what some of us were worried he would do. His numbers have came way down since they have played better defenses, not even great defenses. SF and Seattles defenses are a shell of themselves this year.

 

[jrry32]

But to give it even close to the same weight as someone being primed to be your starter IMO comes off as being disingenuous because I KNOW you study this game and you KNOW there is a huge difference.

Consider our discussion over.

 

[LesBaker]

Very low. But he stepped in due to an injury. Now, they're higher. He has to be a better option than Hill. Hill is healthy now.



I don't think it is. Davis usually does his best work at the start of games.

At this point jrry even with a couple of rough games he is performing at levels that are good enough to keep the job, though I know you don't agree. Right now I think it's fair to say that Hill would not have played well in a couple of games too. He's no master at beating a wicked blitz that I know of and at 35 I think it's also fair to say that a few drives may not have been extended, and that can be the difference between a W and an L.

A slow start isn't a reason to yank a guy who really isn't struggling much more than most guys against the defenses he played and the pressure he was under because of the quality of the opponents, the ton of blitzes and an OL that had a couple of games where they struggled as a unit to keep a pocket for more than 2 seconds.

I hope Fisher lets him play the rest of the year. Let's see him in more situations and lets see what he actually is.

 

[Lesson]

I hope Fisher lets him play the rest of the year. Let's see him in more situations and lets see what he actually is.

This I can agree with. I'd much rather see Davis' play throughout an entire season than Hill's due to the relatively small sample size of games Davis has played in. If Davis continues to struggle for the next 2-3 games, however, that's a different story.

 

[LesBaker]

Dallas is an excellent defense? They are as bad as they were last year. Look at the numbers. Their offense has just protected more than they did last year.

Davis is doing what some of us were worried he would do. His numbers have came way down since they have played better defenses, not even great defenses. SF and Seattles defenses are a shell of themselves this year.

Dallas is 9th in points allowed, isn't that the best measuring stick?

I disagree that SEA and SF are a shell of what they were last year........I call hyperbole on that LOL.

 

[bluecoconuts]

In the experience debate, I'd say that playing games is always the fastest way to develop and learn the game, trial by fire. However sitting and watching and learning for a few years does help a lot, and that is why I don't believe Davis has a really high ceiling as others do. There are things I really like about him, but there are areas that he is lacking that he is unlikely to make significant enough improvements on to be a franchise quarterback for years to come. He should grow a little more of course, but I think in most head to head camp battles, other than guys who are late or undrafted picks. If Bradford is in camp next year healthy, there's almost no chance Davis would beat him, Sam is just smarter and has the superior arm. If we do pick a QB early next year I also think that Davis is in a lot of trouble. I think there's a better than 50% chance Bradford is our starter going into next year, the biggest question is who is the backup, a high draft pick that'll either take over or be trade bait if Sam can prove he's healthy (and still the better talent) or Davis? Either way, I think it would be a shock if Davis is the starter unless we can't get a quality player and Sam is unable to come back to football.

 

[Mikey Ram]

Let's give Davis thisvery ballsy year and go from there before crowing him or dethroning him?

A.Davis will throw for 3 TDs against cards next week. Rams win 34-13 next week. There i said it

Wow, ballsy call...Size of church bells kind of deal...I am pulling for your prognostication in a LARGE way...

 

[CodeMonkey]

Wow, ballsy call...Size of church bells kind of deal...I am pulling for your prognostication in a LARGE way...

Let's not close the book on this kid yet. The truth is we should have drafted a QB of the future type last year or the year before but we didn't so here we are. Hill is most certainly not our future and Davis has definately shown something at times. I think even his biggest detractors have to admit that the conditions yesterday were less than favorable, particularly on pass pro. Our line can be improved. He can be coached up. What the hell else do we have at this point but to get behind the kid. The bickering at this point isnt productive. Horns down!

Austin [clap clap clap] Davis!

 

[RamFan503]

In the experience debate, I'd say that playing games is always the fastest way to develop and learn the game, trial by fire. However sitting and watching and learning for a few years does help a lot, and that is why I don't believe Davis has a really high ceiling as others do. There are things I really like about him, but there are areas that he is lacking that he is unlikely to make significant enough improvements on to be a franchise quarterback for years to come. He should grow a little more of course, but I think in most head to head camp battles, other than guys who are late or undrafted picks. If Bradford is in camp next year healthy, there's almost no chance Davis would beat him, Sam is just smarter and has the superior arm. If we do pick a QB early next year I also think that Davis is in a lot of trouble. I think there's a better than 50% chance Bradford is our starter going into next year, the biggest question is who is the backup, a high draft pick that'll either take over or be trade bait if Sam can prove he's healthy (and still the better talent) or Davis? Either way, I think it would be a shock if Davis is the starter unless we can't get a quality player and Sam is unable to come back to football.

I'd agree with this. Hopefully Davis will surprise. But I don't see him as a long term answer either unless his ceiling is much higher than his current level of play.

I don't however see a shift to Hill as the answer for this team right now. I'm not even saying Hill wouldn't play better. I frankly don't know and I wasn't impressed by what I have seen from him with this offense so I will defer to those who actually have seen them play more and have everything to gain or lose by putting the player they see as the best option for this team.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I'd agree with this. Hopefully Davis will surprise. But I don't see him as a long term answer either unless his ceiling is much higher than his current level of play.

I don't however see a shift to Hill as the answer for this team right now. I'm not even saying Hill wouldn't play better. I frankly don't know and I wasn't impressed by what I have seen from him with this offense so I will defer to those who actually have seen them play more and have everything to gain or lose by putting the player they see as the best option for this team.

I don't really care who plays this year, Hill or Davis would probably yield the same results or pretty close to same at this point.

 

[HometownBoy]

I don't really care who plays this year, Hill or Davis would probably yield the same results or pretty close to same at this point.

I agree, and I believe Fisher understands that as well, which is why he named him the starter. What Davis has over Hill is that he's a work in progression so we don't know what we have in him. He's a variable that's still growing so there's something to be had in watching his development. Season was lost in Cleveland, so there's no harm in going through his growing pains to see what we got. Especially as the Hags and Whiners games have proven that we can win in spite of them.