Is winning pretty more important than winning?

[Sandman]

I see a lot of Bradford discussion out there and it seems like I might be in the minority when it comes to what he should or shouldn't be doing. I think he should, I don't know, do his part?

I understand that fans of the Rams are short on patience, but are we no longer interested in the story anymore? The story being the reconstruction of this team and the eventual coming of age of all the young players? Why is there so much micro-analyzing of what Sam does after every game? Even wins. I read a lot of boards, so this isn't really an indictment of anyone here particularly. It's more or less a net wide phenomenon with a concentrated group of posters.

Does it really matter what other QBs do on their respective teams? Who cares? Dalton did this, Tannehill did that, Luck is doing this, and Griffin is doing that. How does it relate to what Sam Bradford is or isn't doing? Why isn't there any complaining about how Brockers isn't Suh, Quinn isn't JPP or how Saffold isn't Joe Thomas? Is it because they don't count as much in Fantasy Football?

So I'll ask again. Are we more invested in winning pretty (stats) than winning? Sam Bradford may never be a perennial pro-bowler, but he's our QB and we should be invested in his development and hopeful for his success for as long as he remains our QB. As I said, it may only be me. Sam may have only completed 7 passes, but two of them were touchdowns and we won by 14. I don't remember much from my trigonometry classes, but I think there's a mathematical correlation there.

The defense is playing lights out, Zuerlein has a howitzer for a leg, our corners are probably the best in the league right now and as deep as a ravine, the backup OL is holding their own (more or less), Schottenheimer is scheming some nice game plans, special teams are light years better than last year, Hekker has a ridiculous 49.5 average and a 118.0 QBR, Chris Givens could probably lap Usain Bolt, we're +2 in turnovers, a game above .500, and Jeff Fisher is our Head Coach.

I don't care if Sam Bradford carries a 79 rating into the playoffs and it flashes across the ticker while he's hoisting the Lombardi. He's not costing us any wins, and his salary didn't prohibit the Rams from getting the players they wanted. Nor did it cost me any money. This is a team sport, and we have one really good team developing here. I see no reason to doubt that they'll improve dramatically over the course of the season and be a nightmare opponent for everyone else next year. This is a really good story and it's almost like people are missing it in their quest to discredit or run down one player.

Am I way off base here?

Thanks for the pedestal. I'll have it varnished.

 

[F. Mulder]

Sounds good to me. There are stat kings and performers. Bradford may never be a stat-king but he can become someone who can win football games. He is still a work in progress but I have seen significant improvements this year vs. last and see no reason why that cannot continue. Keep a consistent Offensive system/coaching staff, develop the young WRs and OL and let's see how it plays out.

 

[-X-]

I think it's just the nature of the beast. Since the league has trended towards a pass-happy, ratings-generating talent show, it's almost expected that teams should put up gaudy numbers in order to be relevant in this day and age.

But, no. It's not more important. And my preference is quite the opposite. I like to see defenses cripple superstar QBs and shut down superstar RBs. I like it when a team comes together as a whole and plays like a well-oiled machine. I like to see different guys get the kudos every week instead of it always being only about the QB. That really kind of does a disservice to defenses, offensive lines, receivers, special teams, coaching, etc.

Hey Agent Mulder. What happened to your statistical benchmark pieces? Not doing that anymore?

 

[DR RAM]

I see a lot of Bradford discussion out there and it seems like I might be in the minority when it comes to what he should or shouldn't be doing. I think he should, I don't know, do his part?

I understand that fans of the Rams are short on patience, but are we no longer interested in the story anymore? The story being the reconstruction of this team and the eventual coming of age of all the young players? Why is there so much micro-analyzing of what Sam does after every game? Even wins. I read a lot of boards, so this isn't really an indictment of anyone here particularly. It's more or less a net wide phenomenon with a concentrated group of posters.

Does it really matter what other QBs do on their respective teams? Who cares? Dalton did this, Tannehill did that, Luck is doing this, and Griffin is doing that. How does it relate to what Sam Bradford is or isn't doing? Why isn't there any complaining about how Brockers isn't Suh, Quinn isn't JPP or how Saffold isn't Joe Thomas? Is it because they don't count as much in Fantasy Football?

So I'll ask again. Are we more invested in winning pretty (stats) than winning? Sam Bradford may never be a perennial pro-bowler, but he's our QB and we should be invested in his development and hopeful for his success for as long as he remains our QB. As I said, it may only be me. Sam may have only completed 7 passes, but two of them were touchdowns and we won by 14. I don't remember much from my trigonometry classes, but I think there's a mathematical correlation there.

The defense is playing lights out, Zuerlein has a howitzer for a leg, our corners are probably the best in the league right now and as deep as a ravine, the backup OL is holding their own (more or less), Schottenheimer is scheming some nice game plans, special teams are light years better than last year, Hekker has a ridiculous 49.5 average and a 118.0 QBR, Chris Givens could probably lap Usain Bolt, we're +2 in turnovers, a game above .500, and Jeff Fisher is our Head Coach.

I don't care if Sam Bradford carries a 79 rating into the playoffs and it flashes across the ticker while he's hoisting the Lombardi. He's not costing us any wins, and his salary didn't prohibit the Rams from getting the players they wanted. Nor did it cost me any money. This is a team sport, and we have one really good team developing here. I see no reason to doubt that they'll improve dramatically over the course of the season and be a nightmare opponent for everyone else next year. This is a really good story and it's almost like people are missing it in their quest to discredit or run down one player.

Am I way off base here?

Thanks for the pedestal. I'll have it varnished.

I concur with Mulder in seeing improvements in Sam.

On this board, we don't bitch about every little thing, and we don't over analyze Sam. In fact, most of us like him. I agree that Sam plays to win, I like that. I have no problem with him throwing the ball away if the pocket collapses. Sam doesn't make a lot of mistakes and I love that. It appears as if Sam has this offense down pretty well, so I would like to see him have a little continuity. The one thing that I see, slaps me right in the face every time I study the game, is that The Rams don't have a go to guy on short yardage/red zone plays. It was never more evident than the ball that Gibson dropped on 4th and 2 in the last game. Until Pettis or Quick, or we acquire someone else to do that consistently, we will continue to struggle in that aspect of the game. Danny is great, but he's not that guy.

 

[-X-]

The one thing that I see, slaps me right in the face every time I study the game, is that The Rams don't have a go to guy on short yardage/red zone plays. It was never more evident than the ball that Gibson dropped on 4th and 2 in the last game. Until Pettis or Quick, or we acquire someone else to do that consistently, we will continue to struggle in that aspect of the game. Danny is great, but he's not that guy.

Kinda agree with that, but Danny doesn't drop that ball. His 3rd down conversion stats are pretty awesome. That said, his target area isn't real huge. I'd like to think that Pettis or Quick could become that guy too. Pettis in particular has a huge catching radius and really sticky hands.

Not to derail the point of the OP, of course.

 

[Thordaddy]

Nope and right now Sam is the best QB in our division with the most upside.I will at times critique his play and some could construe it as hating on the guy, but he'll be fine and will actually IMO win pretty in time, cuz he's got the talent and the work ethic all he needs is health and a good org. so far he has all he needs.

 

[F. Mulder]

I think it's just the nature of the beast. Since the league has trended towards a pass-happy, ratings-generating talent show, it's almost expected that teams should put up gaudy numbers in order to be relevant in this day and age.

But, no. It's not more important. And my preference is quite the opposite. I like to see defenses cripple superstar QBs and shut down superstar RBs. I like it when a team comes together as a whole and plays like a well-oiled machine. I like to see different guys get the kudos every week instead of it always being only about the QB. That really kind of does a disservice to defenses, offensive lines, receivers, special teams, coaching, etc.

Hey Agent Mulder. What happened to your statistical benchmark pieces? Not doing that anymore?

You remember, you really remember (said in a Sally Field voice if you didn't get it).

Time is my enemy and my friend. I will probably take a look during the bye week. I'm curious as well.

 

[Sandman]

Nope and right now Sam is the best QB in our division with the most upside.I will at times critique his play and some could construe it as hating on the guy, but he'll be fine and will actually IMO win pretty in time, cuz he's got the talent and the work ethic all he needs is health and a good org. so far he has all he needs.

Critique is fine. Nobody is above or beyond critiquing. It's just that for some odd reason, people seem to really dislike the 'idea' that Sam Bradford is our QB. It's almost as though his failings bring them joy. Again, that's not a real prevalent thing, but it's definitely out there.

I read recently where the Rams had 23 guys on offense who aren't on this team, and a good amount of those guys aren't even playing anymore. I'd like to find that article or quote again, because it was pretty telling. It's easy enough to recall from memory though. Mark Clayton, Donnie Avery, Danario Alexander, Brandon Lloyd, Laurent Robinson, Mardy Gilyard, Mike Sims-Walker, Greg Salas, Michael Hoomanawanui, Jason Smith, Jacob Bell, Jason Brown, Adam Goldberg, Tony Wragge, Renardo Foster, Mark Levoir, Bryan Mattison, or Quinn Ojinnaka......

That's a whole heck of a lot of players that have rotated in and out of this organization that were originally thought to have been some kind of answer for Sam Bradford. Some were, some weren't, some peaked, some got injured, some got cut, and some thought they could do better elsewhere. Either way, that's too much turnover for a 24 year old QB who was called upon to solve a bunch of problems that a QB could never solve.

 

[DR RAM]

The one thing that I see, slaps me right in the face every time I study the game, is that The Rams don't have a go to guy on short yardage/red zone plays. It was never more evident than the ball that Gibson dropped on 4th and 2 in the last game. Until Pettis or Quick, or we acquire someone else to do that consistently, we will continue to struggle in that aspect of the game. Danny is great, but he's not that guy.

Kinda agree with that, but Danny doesn't drop that ball. His 3rd down conversion stats are pretty awesome. That said, his target area isn't real huge. I'd like to think that Pettis or Quick could become that guy too. Pettis in particular has a huge catching radius and really sticky hands.

Not to derail the point of the OP, of course.

Yeah, that wasn't a dig on the mouse on crack, but he's not a guy that you tell to go to the 1st down marker and turn around. Linebackers and bigger corners will eat him up. Danny needs a little time to get open, and sometimes we don't have it. The play to Gibson was a perfect example, needed 2, blitz, perfect play called, great throw, pressure by the db, and drop. You'd like to think once Quick develops, he screens the db out and catches that every time.

Another thing that Sam hasn't been afforded is that chemistry between him and his receivers and lineman. Those numbers they quoted before the GB game must be highs in the league for a QB. Most different WR's and most different OL'man over the last 3 years.

 

[Sandman]

Another thing that Sam hasn't been afforded is that chemistry between him and his receivers and lineman. Those numbers they quoted before the GB game must be highs in the league for a QB. Most different WR's and most different OL'man over the last 3 years.

That's what I'm talking about. That statistic. Do you have that? The exact number or where to find it?

Thanks!

 

[-X-]

I think it's just the nature of the beast. Since the league has trended towards a pass-happy, ratings-generating talent show, it's almost expected that teams should put up gaudy numbers in order to be relevant in this day and age.

But, no. It's not more important. And my preference is quite the opposite. I like to see defenses cripple superstar QBs and shut down superstar RBs. I like it when a team comes together as a whole and plays like a well-oiled machine. I like to see different guys get the kudos every week instead of it always being only about the QB. That really kind of does a disservice to defenses, offensive lines, receivers, special teams, coaching, etc.

Hey Agent Mulder. What happened to your statistical benchmark pieces? Not doing that anymore?

You remember, you really remember (said in a Sally Field voice if you didn't get it).

Time is my enemy and my friend. I will probably take a look during the bye week. I'm curious as well.

LOL. I knew that quote right away.

No hurry. Just wondering why you quit doing it is all. That was always pretty interesting.

 

[bluecoconuts]

The one thing that I see, slaps me right in the face every time I study the game, is that The Rams don't have a go to guy on short yardage/red zone plays. It was never more evident than the ball that Gibson dropped on 4th and 2 in the last game. Until Pettis or Quick, or we acquire someone else to do that consistently, we will continue to struggle in that aspect of the game. Danny is great, but he's not that guy.

Kinda agree with that, but Danny doesn't drop that ball. His 3rd down conversion stats are pretty awesome. That said, his target area isn't real huge. I'd like to think that Pettis or Quick could become that guy too. Pettis in particular has a huge catching radius and really sticky hands.

Not to derail the point of the OP, of course.

I love how Pettis catches, I hope we develop him further. Even that little TD at the end of the Packers game, he caught it with his hands correctly instead of cradling it like so many people do. I think that Pettis can develop to be a better more reliable Gibson.

 

[DR RAM]

Another thing that Sam hasn't been afforded is that chemistry between him and his receivers and lineman. Those numbers they quoted before the GB game must be highs in the league for a QB. Most different WR's and most different OL'man over the last 3 years.

That's what I'm talking about. That statistic. Do you have that? The exact number or where to find it?

Thanks!

I heard it before the GB game, I didn't see it printed. If anyone has the game on tape, they can probably retrieve it. I only have the shortcut recorded. They were staggering numbers though.

 

[-X-]

Another thing that Sam hasn't been afforded is that chemistry between him and his receivers and lineman. Those numbers they quoted before the GB game must be highs in the league for a QB. Most different WR's and most different OL'man over the last 3 years.

That's what I'm talking about. That statistic. Do you have that? The exact number or where to find it?

Thanks!

I heard it before the GB game, I didn't see it printed. If anyone has the game on tape, they can probably retrieve it. I only have the shortcut recorded. They were staggering numbers though.

Thanks Doc. I'll see if I can find it.
I have the Game Rewind, so I'll video it.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Wasn't it 25 different linemen and 30 different receivers over the last 3 years?

 

[Sandman]

Another thing that Sam hasn't been afforded is that chemistry between him and his receivers and lineman. Those numbers they quoted before the GB game must be highs in the league for a QB. Most different WR's and most different OL'man over the last 3 years.

That's what I'm talking about. That statistic. Do you have that? The exact number or where to find it?

Thanks!

I heard it before the GB game, I didn't see it printed. If anyone has the game on tape, they can probably retrieve it. I only have the shortcut recorded. They were staggering numbers though.

Thanks Doc. I'll see if I can find it.
I have the Game Rewind, so I'll video it.

Fantastic. Thanks guys! :cheese:

 

[Selassie I]

Winning "pretty" only counts in the popularity contest aka college football.


Personally , I'm enjoying the growth I'm watching in Sam and the rest of the team every week. No matter who our opponent may be,,, I feel like we have a chance to win,,,, I haven't felt that way for too long leading up to this year.

 

[F. Mulder]

I think it's just the nature of the beast. Since the league has trended towards a pass-happy, ratings-generating talent show, it's almost expected that teams should put up gaudy numbers in order to be relevant in this day and age.

But, no. It's not more important. And my preference is quite the opposite. I like to see defenses cripple superstar QBs and shut down superstar RBs. I like it when a team comes together as a whole and plays like a well-oiled machine. I like to see different guys get the kudos every week instead of it always being only about the QB. That really kind of does a disservice to defenses, offensive lines, receivers, special teams, coaching, etc.

Hey Agent Mulder. What happened to your statistical benchmark pieces? Not doing that anymore?

You remember, you really remember (said in a Sally Field voice if you didn't get it).

Time is my enemy and my friend. I will probably take a look during the bye week. I'm curious as well.

LOL. I knew that quote right away.

No hurry. Just wondering why you quit doing it is all. That was always pretty interesting.

I guess I took a break because between the losing and what the numbers said was so disappointment that it sucked the energy and enthusiasm out of it. This year I feel more enthused FWIW.

 

[-X-]

Winning "pretty" only counts in the popularity contest aka college football.


Personally , I'm enjoying the growth I'm watching in Sam and the rest of the team every week. No matter who our opponent may be,,, I feel like we have a chance to win,,,, I haven't felt that way for too long leading up to this year.

That's the truth. I didn't realize what I was missing, apparently. I was all for giving the other guys some more time to figure it out, but obviously Stan & Big Kev knew what they were doing. So, I guess what I'm really saying is ...

I was wrrrrr....

I was wrroooo-ooo....

I was WRRRrrrrRRR...

I dunno. I was something.

 

[-X-]

I guess I took a break because between the losing and what the numbers said was so disappointment that it sucked the energy and enthusiasm out of it. This year I feel more enthused FWIW.

Totally understandable. :ww: