Hill isn't a drop off versus Bradford IMO

[HE WITH HORNS]

It's not a huge dropoff, but there is a dropoff. There wont be many 50+ yard passes in the air. But Hill is a pretty capable QB.
The biggest problem with all of this, is now Austin Davis is our backup, and that IS a big step down from what we had.

 

[BatteringRambo]

Similar to Bulger and his big contact yet he never had much of an Oline, and Bruce/Holt were past their prime among other factors. I am not comparing SB to Bulger (honest). I get a salary cap is involved wit imperfect balance of so much else (draft pick crap shoots)...I'm just a die hard fan. Our Rams FO really fucking tanked for awhile in so many ways even though I remained so optimistic every season no matter what. Eventually the shit hits the fan. Also not acting like an expert GM or owner we just never put the full package around SB. What the future holds for him or our Rams at QB I hope to the franchise's sake Stan keeps Fisher and Snead!

 

[209RamsFan]

I hate this word...but yup..." Manage " the game....and our defense will keep us in every game

 

[jrry32]

Hill is a drop off. But he's capable...as long as he hasn't fallen off in his time away.

 

[Ram Quixote]

Alright Les, I'll tell you what the drop-off is. It's the difference between short term and long term. Last Saturday we had long term; Sunday we had short term.

Bradford is 26; Hill is 34. As simple as that.

Btw, I agree with whoever pointed out that Bradford's 2011 season was dragging down his career passing percentage, along with his per pass average.

 

[OldRock]

Two words. Peyton Manning. Bottom line is our defense has to win this for us this year. I'm fine with Hill being our Wilson.

 

[LesBaker]

Well said, pretty much ended the debate right there.

Shaun Hill vs. Sam Bradford = no drop off?

Sorry Les but...ehhh nevermind, we need good stuff and this has somehow lasted 5 pages to date. (incredible)

I expect Shaun Hill to do a very commendable job, hell Randy Moss sez so, but to actually write there will be "no" drop off?

OK then other than arm strength and age what is Bradford better at than Hill?

I've seen ZERO information that makes me think Bradford is superior to Hill overall. I think people are in love with what they WANT Bradford to be versus what he actually DID to date in his career. And what he has done is pretty much EXACTLY what Hill has done.

 

[LesBaker]

Tell me you see the correlation.

Alright Les, I'll tell you what the drop-off is. It's the difference between short term and long term. Last Saturday we had long term; Sunday we had short term.

Bradford is 26; Hill is 34. As simple as that.

Btw, I agree with whoever pointed out that Bradford's 2011 season was dragging down his career passing percentage, along with his per pass average.

I don't agree because if Bradford doesn't have a big year this season is he "long term"? I would say he wouldn't be. Before the knee injury a few days ago, just a few days ago, the jury was still out on Bradford after 4 years, and that's not a good sign for a QB. So there is absolutely no assurance he was the long term answer.

Bradford without 2011 is still a very average QB, he's done exactly nothing noteworthy since being drafted. I'm not beating him up about it, I'm more telling the fans who think the season is lost that the guy who is next man up is as capable as Bradford. And if some posters don't like that I'm fine with it.......but prove me wrong because the facts and history are on my side.

Potential isn't production, and while Bradford has/had more upside than Hill he hasn't shown it or produced like it and that's the truth.

 

[Ram Quixote]

It's obvious you won't be swayed by anything anyone here has to say...

 

[junkman]

I had an epiphany for 2014 and Hill. Folks seem concerned that Hill doesn't have Bradford's arm, and the opposing D will put 8 in the box to take away the run. Possibly.

While Hill might not have Bradford's arm, he's shown more of a willingness to take downfield shots to our newly minted big boy receivers, Britt and Quick. Putting 8 in the box is just begging the Rams to take deep shots (or deep back shoulder fades).

Bradshaw made it to the HoF using that same offensive philosophy. "If they are open, throw it to them. If they are covered, throw it anyway and let them show their athleticism".

As a comparison, while Bradford seemed in previous years to like his crossing patterns, digs and outs, he was somewhat reluctant to take his downfield shots. "Captain Checkdown" as some fans called him.

** I still don't believe Hill is the answer for 2015 and beyond, but I'm not writing off 2014 by any stretch.

 

[Legatron4]

So after 5 pages peoples opinion have changed right? No? Hmm, that's weird.

 

[BigRamFan]

I don't agree because if Bradford doesn't have a big year this season is he "long term"? I would say he wouldn't be. Before the knee injury a few days ago, just a few days ago, the jury was still out on Bradford after 4 years, and that's not a good sign for a QB. So there is absolutely no assurance he was the long term answer.

Bradford without 2011 is still a very average QB, he's done exactly nothing noteworthy since being drafted. I'm not beating him up about it, I'm more telling the fans who think the season is lost that the guy who is next man up is as capable as Bradford. And if some posters don't like that I'm fine with it.......but prove me wrong because the facts and history are on my side.

Potential isn't production, and while Bradford has/had more upside than Hill he hasn't shown it or produced like it and that's the truth.

@LesBaker you keep pointing out that the production has been similar. From a purely statistical standpoint you are correct. However, to me it is telling that it took Hill 3x as long to reach these "similar" numbers (12 yrs. vs. 4). Add in all of the other variables and I simply cannot understand your viewpoint. I agree that Hill is a great option as a backup. That is, in fact, what he has been his entire career. But there is a reason he didn't receive D1 offers in college and went undrafted.

I am a S. Hill fan as we speak. He is our QB1 at the moment, after all. But no drop off?

 

[LesBaker]

@LesBaker you keep pointing out that the production has been similar. From a purely statistical standpoint you are correct. However, to me it is telling that it took Hill 3x as long to reach these "similar" numbers (12 yrs. vs. 4). Add in all of the other variables and I simply cannot understand your viewpoint. I agree that Hill is a great option as a backup. That is, in fact, what he has been his entire career. But there is a reason he didn't receive D1 offers in college and went undrafted.

I am a S. Hill fan as we speak. He is our QB1 at the moment, after all. But no drop off?

Hill came into the NFL in 2005, he isn't a 12 year vet.

Anyway what I mean by similar production is this, look at these important statistical categories and you'll see.

TD %
Hill 4.3
Bradford 3.4

INT %
Hill 2.4
Bradford 2.2

Completion %
Hill 61.9
Bradford 58.6

YPA
Hill 6.7
Bradford 6.3

YPC
Hill 10.8
Bradford 10.7

Rating
Hill 85.9
Bradford 79.3 (though Bradfords was rising)

I'm ignoring career totals for the most part (other than rating) and only looking at what each guy does on a per game/per throw basis. They are so similar in production that I don't think there is a drop off. Yes Bradford is younger and has a stronger arm but that hasn't, and usually doesn't, translated to higher production on the field. Arm strength, according to all the QB guru's, is the single most over rated trait a QB can have so that argument has little validity to me but I understand that many people are enamored with it.

Hill isn't the answer for this team long term, but he is the answer for this year and as a fan that's all I can ask for right now. I'll let Snead and Fisher decide what to do with Bradford and the QB position going forward.

One thing I won't do is worry about the season going down the tubes because Hill is stepping in for Bradford because while he is a different type/style of QB he brings about the same production. In other words if this team is fated to win 10 games IMO they would do it with either guy under center.

 

[F. Mulder]

I think Hill is/was the perfect BACKUP QB. He doesn't make dumb mistakes, knows how to read defenses, knows the offense, and can execute--given relatively ideal circumstances. IF the hyped D, or should I say D-Line, plays like it is capable of and Williams is able to convert a bend but not break Defense into an aggressive playmaking Defense, the Rams have a chance in every game realistically. What will show Hill's warts is if the D doesn't perform and the Rams find themselves down by more than 10 points after halftime where you lean on your QB to lead the comeback. He is capable and is a huge upgrade over Kevin "I just threw the ball through the goal posts" Clemens, but his limitations and strengths will show on close games.

I still worry the D isn't all the hype is leading up to. IMO when you become run-stuffers it is much easier to be pass rushers. 3rd and 2 doesn't allow for pass rushing. Nor do DBs who allowed opposing QB something like a 90+ QBR. That has to change. I still think we are a LBer and DB short and losing Tru doesn't help and the Safeties give me little solace.

 

[BigRamFan]

Hill came into the NFL in 2005, he isn't a 12 year vet./QUOTE]

He came into the league in 2002 with the Vikings. It just took him until 2005 to get into a game.

 

[BigRamFan]

Sorry @LesBaker , I screwed up the quote above.

 

[LesBaker]

Sorry @LesBaker , I screwed up the quote above.

No worries.....

I didn't know he rode the pine for a few years so you're right about that.

I'm right about everything else though.

 

[LesBaker]

I think Hill is/was the perfect BACKUP QB. He doesn't make dumb mistakes, knows how to read defenses, knows the offense, and can execute--given relatively ideal circumstances. IF the hyped D, or should I say D-Line, plays like it is capable of and Williams is able to convert a bend but not break Defense into an aggressive playmaking Defense, the Rams have a chance in every game realistically. What will show Hill's warts is if the D doesn't perform and the Rams find themselves down by more than 10 points after halftime where you lean on your QB to lead the comeback. He is capable and is a huge upgrade over Kevin "I just threw the ball through the goal posts" Clemens, but his limitations and strengths will show on close games.

I still worry the D isn't all the hype is leading up to. IMO when you become run-stuffers it is much easier to be pass rushers. 3rd and 2 doesn't allow for pass rushing. Nor do DBs who allowed opposing QB something like a 90+ QBR. That has to change. I still think we are a LBer and DB short and losing Tru doesn't help and the Safeties give me little solace.

Always a good read FM and I wish you'd post more.

 

[69superbowl]

Hill is not a big drop off from Sam, but think about this:

You're picking a team tomorrow to play one game. Both guys healthy, who you picking? To me, it's not even close. Like Hill, love Sam.

Bradford was going to tear it up this year; bigger, stronger, smarter - with one exception. That damn knee. He showed well in damn pre-season. You couldn't miss the snap on the damn ball, the accuracy of the throws - the kind of throws he was finally comfortable making, and trusting, with this group. The Rams are better throughout the roster. Hill will benefit from that as much as Sam would have. I just hope he can hold up. To say they are equals as QBs, in 2014, is a stretch.

Ack, still a kick in the nuts. Damn.

 

[-X-]

Hill came into the NFL in 2005, he isn't a 12 year vet.

You might think it's semantics, but he was signed as a UDFA in 2002 by the Vikings - 12 years ago.