Davis

[MFaulk107]

It's not like he can't progress, it's.his first season! I don't see Hill in there.

 

[HometownBoy]

Actually I like him.I like the fact that he threw his helmet down when he made those mistake showing how much he cares.He will make a good quarterback someday.I just feel that Hill will give us a better chance to win against certain teams.If the defense keep playing the way they are we could still make the playoffs.

That's fair, while I disagree and think playoffs fell out of the picture with Bradford these are both just opinions and mine isn't any more smarter than yours just because I yell it loud enough. I'm just saying, people are having this same argument we've had now since the Cowboys game. I think it's silly to beat down the doors over our 3rd stringer in lieu of say, "Haha we just beat the Hags and the Whiners oh my god eat a dick you stupid crybabies. Kaepernick more like Crapherdick, mmm yes cry more babies let me eat your whiney bitch tears hahah Rams on top bitches." Or you know, something to that effect.

 

[moklerman]

Gotta agree with those preaching patience. We're talking about a guy with less than a half a season starting under his belt.

Decimated o-line, lost his #1 WR and now on third running back. Not to mention all the defensive struggles that have lost some games. He should get the year to show what he can do.

 

[jrry32]

The things you are talking about are quite common for young QBs. The new QBs do it every year. RGIII does it, Cousins does it, Kap does it, G. Smith, etc, etc. Every team we've played except KC (even SEA with St Wilson), their fans complain of these things. PT is the only cure. Handling the blitz is a learned skill, not an innate talent.
And again, Bradford got 3 years, Quick got 3, some people are willing to give Pead 4, Robinson is going to get 3, but a PS player in his 8th game mostly against good defenses gets the "I'm tired of excuses" treatment? When 1st rounders on other teams are getting benched? Or in mid-bust? I don't get it.

Davis is in his third year.

He played a perennial powerhouse team and played just well enough to eke out a win, and not badly enough to make us lose.

Why can't we be happy?

It's almost as though we LOST this game, and the reason that we lost was Austin Davis.

He didn't play well enough to win. We won because the defense picked up the slack. It shouldn't have been a close game. Davis cost us 14 points and gave the 49ers 7.

We could have very easily lost that game if the refs call things differently. And Davis would have been the biggest reason BY FAR for that loss.

I am happy the Rams won but I want a competitive team. And we need good QB play to be competitive.

 

[moklerman]

Does it bear mentioning that Davis' passer rating is still higher than Hill's? And compared to the last time Hill had any significant playing time in 2010, Davis' completion % is higher, YPA is higher, TD% is higher and INT% is lower. Maybe he isn't everything we all want, but he's younger, cheaper, playing better and more durable than Hill is now.

 

[Prime Time]

Davis is in his third year.

On the bench and the practice squad maybe. You do know that QB's don't get many reps with the starting unit when they're in that position don't you? You make it sound like he has 3 years worth of NFL QB experience which if so is just a bit disingenuous.

 

[jrry32]

On the bench and the practice squad maybe. You do know that QB's don't get many reps with the starting unit when they're in that position don't you? You make it sound like he has 3 years worth of NFL QB experience which if so is just a bit disingenuous.

No, it's not disingenuous. He's been here three years. He knows the system(one of the toughest parts of being a rookie QB), he's had the opportunity to work with other QBs and coaches when it comes to film and breaking down defenses, he's gotten technical work, etc.

You don't have to be the starter to reap the rewards of being on the team. He's been here 3 years. He's not a rookie. It's not the same thing.

 

[Prime Time]

No, it's not disingenuous. He's been here three years. He knows the system(one of the toughest parts of being a rookie QB), he's had the opportunity to work with other QBs and coaches when it comes to film and breaking down defenses, he's gotten technical work, etc.

You don't have to be the starter to reap the rewards of being on the team. He's been here 3 years. He's not a rookie. It's not the same thing.

Never said he was a rookie. If he was I'd be even more vehement about giving the guy a break. The fact is he's probably had very few reps with the starting team which affects timing with his receivers, RB's, TE's, and O-line. There's a big difference between practice, watching game film and stepping on the field during an actual game. Any NFL player will attest to that.

 

[drasconis]

Davis cost us 14 points and gave the 49ers 7.

I get the giving them 7...but it is a big jump to say he cost us 14. Not even the GSOT gota touchdown every possession. We were on the 25 and 44....not even FG range.

 

[jrry32]

I get the giving them 7...but it is a big jump to say he cost us 14. Not even the GSOT gota touchdown every possession. We were on the 25 and 44....not even FG range.

Kenny Britt was open for a TD. He underthrew it and it was picked off. Lance Kendricks was open for a TD. He missed him and threw the ball away. These were two different drives that didn't result in TDs.

It's not a big jump at all to say he cost us 14.

Never said he was a rookie. If he was I'd be even more vehement about giving the guy a break. The fact is he's probably had very few reps with the starting team which affects timing with his receivers, RB's, TE's, and O-line. There's a big difference between practice, watching game film and stepping on the field during an actual game. Any NFL player will attest to that.

He's had many weeks to get timing down. The lack of timing isn't due to him not playing. It's due to him flushing from the pocket.

Again, the guy has had 8 games after being here for 2 years prior to this. It's not his first start. His performance is getting gradually worse. Which is what worries me. With players like Davis that come in and play well off the bat, they sometimes get exposed. They have to adapt. He's not adapting. Same thing happened to Case Keenum last year.

 

[RamFan503]

Davis is in his third year.

Going with that? Really?

OK - and so is Foles who is also coming off a Probowl year and yet AD is playing better even considering yesterday's poor performance.

I don't think AD looks like the answer right now but I really don't know how Hill is looking in comparison right now with this team.

One thing I do know however is that considering Davis as a third year player isn't exactly going to help your argument.

 

[HometownBoy]

He's had many weeks to get timing down. The lack of timing isn't due to him not playing. It's due to him flushing from the pocket.

Again, the guy has had 8 games after being here for 2 years prior to this. It's not his first start. His performance is getting gradually worse. Which is what worries me. With players like Davis that come in and play well off the bat, they sometimes get exposed. They have to adapt. He's not adapting. Same thing happened to Case Keenum last year.

That's why people are saying your argument is disingenuous Jrry. You keep adding his time here like it amounts to something. Sure he's in his third year, but lets not act like he was doing too much. He was riding the pines buried in our depth chart teetering on being released multiple times. He was holding clipboard for Kellen Clemens for goodness sakes. Sure being on a team helps and he's probably where he is right now because of it, but lets not act like it's the same breed as starting or even just being the second man up. Dude was a 3rd stringer for all 2 of those years, of course he has issues that need to be ironed out, this is his 8th game played ever. Let me say that again, his 8 game ever, AT ALL. Adding his actual time as an active participation in the league as anything but the superfluous detail it is is disingenuous, because it implies that somehow he should have gotten more than what he did especially when a good chunk of that time was spent on the street.

 

[jrry32]

That's why people are saying your argument is disingenuous Jrry. You keep adding his time here like it amounts to something. Sure he's in his third year, but lets not act like he was doing too much. He was riding the pines buried in our depth chart teetering on being released multiple times. He was holding clipboard for Kellen Clemens for goodness sakes.

Aaron Rodgers held the clipboard in Green Bay. Philip Rivers held it in San Diego. You don't think that helped them? You think they would have done as well as a rookie as they did in their 3rd/4th year? People are treating Austin Davis like a rookie. He's not a rookie. His time here ABSOLUTELY AMOUNTS TO SOMETHING. He knows the playbook, he knows the terminology, he knows the checks/audibles/hot reads/etc., he has worked with our coaches on his technique, he has worked with our coaches and QBs on diagnosing defenses, watching film, and understands what it is to be a pro, and he has practiced with the players on this roster.

That's a massive advantage over a rookie QB. I'm not ignoring him being a first time starter but I'm also not ignoring the fact that he's not a rookie. This isn't a guy that doesn't know the offense or isn't mentally prepared. I have been patient with Davis. I have been fair with Davis. And now I'm frustrated with Davis. Whether people like it or not, I have taken a very reasonable position with Davis and my frustration has been earned by him. You can call my argument disingenuous because you don't agree but it's not.

Rather than dismissing a view that you don't agree with as disingenuous, it might be worthwhile to consider the merits of it. Whether or not you agree with my stance, there's certainly merits to it.

Sure being on a team helps and he's probably where he is right now because of it, but lets not act like it's the same breed as starting or even just being the second man up. Dude was a 3rd stringer for all 2 of those years, of course he has issues that need to be ironed out, this is his 8th game played ever. Let me say that again, his 8 game ever, AT ALL. Adding his actual time as an active participation in the league as anything but the superfluous detail it is is disingenuous, because it implies that somehow he should have gotten more than what he did especially when a good chunk of that time was spent on the street.

No, it's not disingenuous. It's a fact. This is his third year with the Rams. I did not claim him to be a third year starter. But there's a VAST difference between a third year pro that's in his first year as a starter and a rookie starter. They should not be treated equally.

I have been patient and kept in mind his lack of starting experience throughout the year. Feel free to go back and look at my previous posts on Davis. I gave him every opportunity and he's not doing what I believe he has to...he's not improving and adapting. That's what you have to do. If you don't, you get exposed. The 49ers exposed Austin Davis.

Going with that? Really?

OK - and so is Foles who is also coming off a Probowl year and yet AD is playing better even considering yesterday's poor performance.

I don't think AD looks like the answer right now but I really don't know how Hill is looking in comparison right now with this team.

One thing I do know however is that considering Davis as a third year player isn't exactly going to help your argument.

I'm not a fan of Foles either.

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

 

[Mojo Ram]

Think Hill has to get the next start.

I'm sort of leaning this way too at this point, but it's a tough call.

 

[LesBaker]

Some nice points .
Also. AM I the only one thinks the coaching staff has reeled him in from his gunslinger persona? We have played some of the best defenses in the league the past 4 weeks as well. I feel the coaching staff have tried to get him to be more of a game manager. The "take what the defense gives you" train of thought seems a bit out of the box for this kid. He seems to play better on the fly.
He has room to grow though. I think k the kid has what it takes to play. Let him play.

I think they have and I think they should just let him play his style. It started a couple of weeks ago when he was going to the checkdown right away

Never said he was a rookie. If he was I'd be even more vehement about giving the guy a break. The fact is he's probably had very few reps with the starting team which affects timing with his receivers, RB's, TE's, and O-line. There's a big difference between practice, watching game film and stepping on the field during an actual game. Any NFL player will attest to that.

He never got reps with the 1's until Hill got hurt.

 

[jrry32]

I'm sort of leaning this way too at this point, but it's a tough call.

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.

 

[HometownBoy]

Aaron Rodgers held the clipboard in Green Bay. Philip Rivers held it in San Diego. You don't think that helped them? You think they would have done as well as a rookie as they did in their 3rd/4th year? People are treating Austin Davis like a rookie. He's not a rookie. His time here ABSOLUTELY AMOUNTS TO SOMETHING. He knows the playbook, he knows the terminology, he knows the checks/audibles/hot reads/etc., he has worked with our coaches on his technique, he has worked with our coaches and QBs on diagnosing defenses, watching film, and understands what it is to be a pro, and he has practiced with the players on this roster.

That's a massive advantage over a rookie QB. I'm not ignoring him being a first time starter but I'm also not ignoring the fact that he's not a rookie. This isn't a guy that doesn't know the offense or isn't mentally prepared. I have been patient with Davis. I have been fair with Davis. And now I'm frustrated with Davis. Whether people like it or not, I have taken a very reasonable position with Davis and my frustration has been earned by him. You can call my argument disingenuous because you don't agree but it's not.

Rather than dismissing a view that you don't agree with as disingenuous, it might be worthwhile to consider the merits of it. Whether or not you agree with my stance, there's certainly merits to it.



No, it's not disingenuous. It's a fact. This is his third year with the Rams. I did not claim him to be a third year starter. But there's a VAST difference between a third year pro that's in his first year as a starter and a rookie starter. They should not be treated equally.

I have been patient and kept in mind his lack of starting experience throughout the year. Feel free to go back and look at my previous posts on Davis. I gave him every opportunity and he's not doing what I believe he has to...he's not improving and adapting. That's what you have to do. If you don't, you get exposed. The 49ers exposed Austin Davis.

Implying that Davis was on the same level as Rodgers and Rivers is also disingenuous. Are you seriously comparing dudes picked in the first round to Davis? They from the get go were the guys who were going to come in after Favre and Brees. They got to be sculpted and crafted and trained from the day they got there to where they are now. Do you think anything happened with a 3rd stringer in Davis besides hoping that it didn't come to this and having a gun with a single bullet if it did? Not to mention you seem to make it sound like he was holding the clipboard for Bradford. He was behind even Clemens. Meaning he was taking even a back seat to him, which means even Clemens was getting more coaching than Davis. Bad comparison Jrry.

Lets not beat around the bush here, Davis was in no one's thoughts until Minnesota. The only type of experience he ever had was preseason action and films while being the 3rd man up, implying that this is some huge advantage that he isn't taking advantaged of is silly. Dude has nowhere near the same prep or advantage that Bradford or even Clemens and Hill before him had until just now. Acting like being the 3rd on the depth chart at best, practice squader at worst is something great that he's squandered doesn't quite ring true to me. Also why do you keep acting like people are saying he's a rookie? We know he's not, but what we're saying is Davis still has limited progression due to the fact that his experience is rudimentary at best. You saying that he's in his third year as if it means something is where people balked, you're acting as if he's in his third year of being trained to be a future starter, not in his third year of questioning if he'd even be in the league and then suddenly thrown out there.

Especially when NFLers themselves say that film, coaching and that ilk is limited in what it can give a player, and that the best that can happen is real game experience. This is from stars, many moons greater than AD. Saying well he had time to look at film and get coached really doesn't scratch the surface. I'm not trying to argue if AD will be the future or if he's the QB we need, just that the standards in which you are judging him don't fit the circumstance in which he came to be.

Saying he's a done deal 8 whole games into his career is a little bold in a lot of people's heads.

 

[moklerman]

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

I don't think that's a very equitable comparison. Both have been on the roster but being a 3rd string/practice squad QB doesn't really gain a player much. More than a rookie coming in I agree, but Davis got squat in terms of reps in the real offense. While he technically isn't a rookie, I think it's safe to consider him as such.

 

[CodeMonkey]

There sure is a lot of hand wringing in here over a game in which we defeated our arch rival in their house with our third string qb, down 3 O lineman, our best wr, starting DE and more. Take a breath guys. I'm savoring this feeling and I just don't get all get the gloom and doom. Habbit, I guess?

 

[jrry32]

There sure is a lot of hand wringing in here over a game in which we defeated our arch rival in their house with our third string qb, down 3 O lineman, our best wr, starting DE and more. Take a breath guys. I'm savoring this feeling and I just don't get all get the gloom and doom. Habbit, I guess?

Frustration with a player is not gloom and doom. It's not habit. I am unhappy with Austin Davis's play. This is a Rams' forum so I'm going to express that viewpoint.

Implying that Davis was on the same level as Rodgers and Rivers is also disingenuous. Are you seriously comparing dudes picked in the first round to Davis? They from the get go were the guys who were going to come in after Favre and Brees. They got to be sculpted and crafted and trained from the day they got there to where they are now. Do you think anything happened with a 3rd stringer in Davis besides hoping that it didn't come to this and having a gun with a single bullet if it did? Not to mention you seem to make it sound like he was holding the clipboard for Bradford. He was behind even Clemens. Meaning he was taking even a back seat to him, which means even Clemens was getting more coaching than Davis. Bad comparison Jrry.

So Davis was just napping the last two years in St. Louis? There's a lot of bullshit 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 bullshit.

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 bullshit. 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.

Lets not beat around the bush here, Davis was in no one's thoughts until Minnesota. The only type of experience he ever had was preseason action and films while being the 3rd man up, implying that this is some huge advantage that he isn't taking advantaged of is silly. Dude has nowhere near the same prep or advantage that Bradford or even Clemens and Hill before him had until just now. Acting like being the 3rd on the depth chart at best, practice squader at worst is something great that he's squandered doesn't quite ring true to me. Also why do you keep acting like people are saying he's a rookie? We know he's not, but what we're saying is Davis still has limited progression due to the fact that his experience is rudimentary at best. You saying that he's in his third year as if it means something is where people balked, you're acting as if he's in his third year of being trained to be a future starter, not in his third year of questioning if he'd even be in the league and then suddenly thrown out there.

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.

Especially when NFLers themselves say that film, coaching and that ilk is limited in what it can give a player, and that the best that can happen is real game experience. This is from stars, many moons greater than AD. Saying well he had time to look at film and get coached really doesn't scratch the surface. I'm not trying to argue if AD will be the future or if he's the QB we need, just that the standards in which you are judging him don't fit the circumstance in which he came to be.

Having time to watch film, learn the system, and receive NFL coaching does scratch the surface. It goes a long way actually.

Saying he's a done deal 8 whole games into his career is a little bold in a lot of people's heads.

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. There's a large difference. I don't know if he's a done deal or not. What I do know is that he's not been progressing and he was exposed by San Francisco in a bad way. I want to watch a winning football team. If starting Shaun Hill can provide that, I'm all for it. Give me the guy that gives our team the best chance to win.

Yep, I've used the word bullshit a lot in this post. Because that's exactly what all this is. I'm getting heated so I'm done here.

I don't think that's a very equitable comparison. Both have been on the roster but being a 3rd string/practice squad QB doesn't really gain a player much. More than a rookie coming in I agree, but Davis got squat in terms of reps in the real offense. While he technically isn't a rookie, I think it's safe to consider him as such.

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

It's not safe to consider him a rookie. He's not a rookie.