Rams vs Jags: Gray's Grades (101ESPN/101sports.com)

[-X-]

Speaking of general tendancies. I havent complained about Bradford checking down because most times you cant see what is open or not open down field. There were a couple of times in the Jags game you could see guys open really in the same plane at the guy he went to. I am not really that critical of Bradford and as I have stated over and over again he is the guy as far as Im concerned. Just wondering what would be the possible cause of him not going off of a receiver on certain plays. Who knows? I guess it is not worth asking.

Yeah, it's worth asking. And there are a multitude of possible answers (aka opinions).

Here are our options, some of which you already mentioned:

1. He's just not very good.
2. The play is 'designed' to go to a certain receiver; and unless that receiver falls down, it's his ball.
3. Can't see the play down the field (clogged throwing lane)
4. Not enough time to go through the progressions
5. Saw something pre-snap that looked good, but then post-snap didn't materialize
6. It's his 47th game (compared to someone like Manning's 229th)
7. We don't really know if his issues are above the league norm. How do you quantify something like that?
8. If the Rams start winning, do these concerns about 'locking' and 'checking down' largely disappear?

So yeah, again, it's worth asking and it's a good question.

 

[fearsomefour]

Speaking of general tendancies. I havent complained about Bradford checking down because most times you cant see what is open or not open down field. There were a couple of times in the Jags game you could see guys open really in the same plane at the guy he went to. I am not really that critical of Bradford and as I have stated over and over again he is the guy as far as Im concerned. Just wondering what would be the possible cause of him not going off of a receiver on certain plays. Who knows? I guess it is not worth asking.

Yeah, it's worth asking. And there are a multitude of possible answers (aka opinions).

Here are our options, some of which you already mentioned:

1. He's just not very good.
2. The play is 'designed' to go to a certain receiver; and unless that receiver falls down, it's his ball.
3. Can't see the play down the field (clogged throwing lane)
4. Not enough time to go through the progressions
5. Saw something pre-snap that looked good, but then post-snap didn't materialize
6. It's his 47th game (compared to someone like Manning's 229th)
7. We don't really know if his issues are above the league norm. How do you quantify something like that?
8. If the Rams start winning, do these concerns about 'locking' and 'checking down' largely disappear?

So yeah, again, it's worth asking and it's a good question.

Sorry for getting snarky it just drives me a little nuts sometimes when something is painted as negative that is not meant that way....also, its a blurry line between negativity, honesty and just plain old complaining....we all do some of all three I think. That said, there is not much point of blind optimism either. If everything was postitive or if everything is negative there would be no discussion. So, to ask legitimate questions about things and to be told (not by you) basically to stop complaining is bothersome....but, thats my problems.

I really think number 5 and 6 are key. Experience is key and there is no substitue for it. There are guys who come into the league now and do well (Luck, Wilson ect) but that is the product almost always of a balanced and complete team. Also, having a system that fits the strengths of the QB is key. But the guys that come and struggle and give tons of turnovers away will continue to be the norm for rookies and young QBs.
As for number 7 its a good question. How do you measure something that didnt happen or alternative to what did?
Number 8, who knows? I mean, success breeds success. Being able to run the ball takes some heat off the Oline and would in theory help the receivers get more open; less check downs.
It is interesting and the next two weeks will be key for this year. Has this teams gotten better since the SF debacle or were the Jags a well timed punching bag? The next two weeks (Panthers after this week I think) present two games that should be winable. Really anxious to see if the D can hang solid.

 

[RamzFanz]

Of course, Blackmon was back for this game, but that only highlighted how bad the secondary is. They have yet to stop a decent receiver.



Secondary - D

Blackmon got away uncovered, big mistake, but other than that one play Secondary was OK. Your D grade to harsh
train

Blackmon was open most of the game. The reason he only had 136 yards with 27 yard average is named Gabbert.

IMHO, the Rams have yet to take a top receiver off the board. They will have to this week for any hope for a win.

The truth about the win over the Jags is the Jags laid down. Are you aware they had more passing yards than the Rams? The Rams won by two scores WITH 3 turnovers. There was nothing in that game that showed improvement as far as I could see except for the faint hope that running fairly well on the worst run defense in the league will translate to an actual run game this week.

I still see huge potential for the Rams but I don't see it being used. Hopefully this week is the awakening.