Sam Bradford: In A Class All By Himself

[FRO]

Um, ok.

Career completion percentage is 58.3

Career QB rating is 81.2

It's not that far off. Eli is a good QB that I like a lot. The guy isn't elite and is highly overrated.

 

[dieterbrock]

If he gets hurt again, you let him go.

That's why he has to know all his chip are in this year.

Everything he has ever worked for all comes down to 2014 and him staying on the field and settling this thing once and for all.

Sure, if he goes down again this year someone will pick him up, but no one will trust him to be the guy, fluke or no fluke. He'll be in either a backup roll or an open competition as a stop gap.

What if he doesnt get hurt but X other example comes to fruition? That the rest of the team has a 2011 year? Then what?

 

[dieterbrock]

Career completion percentage is 58.3

Career QB rating is 81.2

It's not that far off. Eli is a good QB that I like a lot. The guy isn't elite and is highly overrated.

Downfield passing attack in an open air stadium that Novemebr to January plays in the low 20-30's and the wind is insane. Put him in a dome his whole career his number would be different, point being overall stats dont matter. Eli put on 2 amazing drives to win those superbowls, and played to an amazing level to get there. Over rated? Could be. Non Elite? Cant say he wasnt during those SB runs. He sucked last year, and thats what people remember most IMO

 

[HE WITH HORNS]

Career completion percentage is 58.3

Career QB rating is 81.2

It's not that far off. Eli is a good QB that I like a lot. The guy isn't elite and is highly overrated.

Exactly, in the regular season, he's been very average. He just happened to get hot and play well in those two post season runs. His brother seems to do just the opposite when he gets to the big game. . . .

 

[-X-]

I really didn't intend for this to become another one of those debates that centers around how Bradford compares to other QBs statistically, or even for it to become a debate about whether or not he's the guy. The author of the article kinda just put it out there that Bradford is a polarizing figure. Fans of this team seem to have branched off into two camps. One that puts a lot of stock into surrounding cast, and another that puts a lot of stock in the idea that an elite QB can transcend most adversity. There's some validity to both arguments, but there's also a lot of hyperbole used that fortifies each respective argument as well.

We'll see how this year shakes out and the coaches will make the decision they think is best for this team afterward. Until then, I'm relatively sure we all want him to succeed. Bradford is a dedicated and hardworking individual; so if he fails, it will be unfortunate to say the least. Ultimately though, most of us have been around long enough to see QBs come and go. If we end up going in a different direction, I just hope we don't get stuck in a Cleveland situation where the turnstile keeps on spinning in perpetuity.

 

[V3]

Are Eli Manning or Joe Flacco elite?

No but they definitely turned their game up to another level in the playoffs. A couple years ago, Flacco went nuts in the playoffs. He didn't play like that previously. Flacco's defense didn't win the SB for him like you can say about QB's like Dilfer or Brad Johnson.

 

[SteveBrown]

CASE #1
#1. in 2011, 2012: Cam Newton, RGiiii, Luck and those guys made Bradford look foolish by winning a lot (!) of games in their first two years.
#2. They had the mobility/legs to do it, when teammates failed them.
#3. Bradford doesn't win games with legs (by himself). And, he got hurt 2x-- in four years.
#4. Therefore Bradford sucks.
This is 13 year old thinking:....you can be a genius, but without wisdom, you will certainly look foolish

CASE#2
1A. Excellent rookie year: bad line, mediocre to bad WR's
1B. 2011 New system: bad line, bad WR's, bad coordinator
2. 2012 New system and really bad O line, mediocre-maybe ok WR's and avg running game. Came back in 49er, Bills and Lions games in the clutch; Played well.
3. 2011 and 2012 mediocre-maybe ok WR's (who still aren't starting material on other teams now: Gibson and Danny A)
4. 2013: great numbers with good line, good running game and bad, bad receivers.
Wiser Thinking: this guy has an incredible arm and so-so WR's, so maybe he can be a really good quarterback with protection like Brady & Manning get.
Brady wasn't a really good QB til his 5th season (2004)....and then great in his 8th.

YOu have to watch the games to understand Bradford. I was disappointed after 4 games last year; but the final 3 games he played were much better
than Brad in his3rd-4th years and as good as Manning. Manning had an all-pro WR, Brady made his WR's, just like Bradford made Gibson and Amendola. Look
at what happened to them. Amendola in the play offs: less than 10 yards. Gibson #3 (off the bench)

 

[Boffo97]

I disagree with the idea that there are Bradford lovers so much as there are Rams fans who are looking at the on field play and asking "Who is at fault for these results?" rather than simply looking at the record and blaming the QB.

I've defended Bradford a lot, but if I saw play where the QB was sucking despite adequate support, or if Shaun Hill or someone else was outplaying him, I'd have no issue calling for someone else.

 

[SteveBrown]

I really didn't intend for this to become another one of those debates that centers around how Bradford .

Too bad for your intentions, this 'Bradford thing' ain't ending until he leaves the team or he has a 100 rating with 10+ wins. I can't wait, it is coming...!

 

[dieterbrock]

No but they definitely turned their game up to another level in the playoffs. A couple years ago, Flacco went nuts in the playoffs. He didn't play like that previously. Flacco's defense didn't win the SB for him like you can say about QB's like Dilfer or Brad Johnson.

Agree. And Johnson gets a bad rap IMO. The guy played some pretty good football (20+ TD 85+ rating) for 3 different teams.
I say he was pro-bowl good at times. Dilfer? Yeah he just sucked and played for an amazing defense. Only good thing is that thank god he replaced Tony Banks, becasue if he would have caddied that team to a Superbowl, my head would have split

 

[Boffo97]

Too bad for your intentions, this 'Bradford thing' ain't ending until he leaves the team or he has a 100 rating with 10+ wins. I can't wait, it is coming...!

Bradford could be the League MVP and lead the team to a 19-0 season, and there'd still be some claiming he was an average guy carried by the rest of the team, and we need to upgrade (read: go with anyone not named Sam Bradford... except Marc Bulger.)

 

[Rambitious1]

That's fair enough, but I have two comments.

1. Bradford actually ranks well against the blitz (ergo, he can read them)
53 of 79 for 572 yards, 67.1% 7.24 YPA, 7 TD's, 1 INT, 1 sack, 112.4 QB Rating.

2. There is nothing he can do to his training regimen that would reduce his injuries (they were all flukes)

Also, I would think a QB would be more likely to be more often injured when he's hit more/harder - i.e. his bad OL's of the past. JMHO.

 

[bomebadeeda]

I have to throw my 2 cents in on this. I think some are getting the cart before the horse. Most of the guys on the list X posted weren't considered "elite" until their team won the thing. And arguments can fly about those guys not being or were the reason they won... (Example: Seattle didn't win because of Russell's performance. they won because of their defense and the Broncos lack of execution...Russell just happened to be in the right place at the right time... Same for Eli....he rode that Giants defense and made a play or 2 when the game was on the line. Both of their games were really about the Giants defense stopping the Patriots juggernaut of an offense.......Flacco, the same and you can make a lot of arguments on the list for any of the guys not named Brady, Montana, Aikman, Farve, Unitas or Young.....).
Like X said, it's a team game but too much focus on the QB spot allows for way too much credit to go to them as well. It's not about having an elite QB, it's about having a team get there and then the QB to execute their game plan to give the team a chance to win.

 

[FRO]

If 2014 is another 2011 there will be a house cleaning with Snead, Fisher, and Bradford all gone. If Bradford misses a large portion of the season there will be a QB picked in the first or second round. If Bradford plays a full year like he was playing last year he will receive a contract extension. That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

Also on the argument of Eli Manning, I don't think he is an elite player. I don't think he is a Hall of Fame player. I think he is very good. I just don't feel a team accomplishment such as a super bowl makes one guy elite. I feel elite is thrown around far too lightly.

 

[FRO]

Downfield passing attack in an open air stadium that Novemebr to January plays in the low 20-30's and the wind is insane. Put him in a dome his whole career his number would be different, point being overall stats dont matter. Eli put on 2 amazing drives to win those superbowls, and played to an amazing level to get there. Over rated? Could be. Non Elite? Cant say he wasnt during those SB runs. He sucked last year, and thats what people remember most IMO

I think you are mistaking moments of greatness with overall greatness. Eli had moments to help win both super bowls. You have to have good QB play to win. I just don't feel there is a huge difference between Sam and Eli. Eli's support cast depreciated in 2013 and he threw 27 INTs. There is no QB out there that can overcome bad support casts. None. Tom Brady without Gronk in 2013 is another perfect example.

 

[Boffo97]

If 2014 is another 2011 there will be a house cleaning with Snead, Fisher, and Bradford all gone. If Bradford misses a large portion of the season there will be a QB picked in the first or second round. If Bradford plays a full year like he was playing last year he will receive a contract extension. That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

Also on the argument of Eli Manning, I don't think he is an elite player. I don't think he is a Hall of Fame player. I think he is very good. I just don't feel a team accomplishment such as a super bowl makes one guy elite. I feel elite is thrown around far too lightly.

If 2014 ended up in a bad record for the same reason that 2011 did (massive injuries), and there was a housecleaning because of it, I'd give up on this team until Kroenke was no longer in charge of it. That kind of move would prove he has no clue how to run a football team.

Now, that said, if they went 2-14 or such without hugely above average injuries, maybe. But it would take something bad for Kroenke to give up on his guy so soon. I'd really like to avoid going back to the 3 years and out coaching carousel.

 

[dieterbrock]

I think you are mistaking moments of greatness with overall greatness. Eli had moments to help win both super bowls. You have to have good QB play to win. I just don't feel there is a huge difference between Sam and Eli. Eli's support cast depreciated in 2013 and he threw 27 INTs. There is no QB out there that can overcome bad support casts. None. Tom Brady without Gronk in 2013 is another perfect example.

Actually, you're mistaking what my point was/is. A mediocre QB does not lead a team to a Superbowl. Just doesnt. Dilfer is the one guy that defies that.. I said a guy has to be able to play at that level at times. You need top level QB play to win, period. In that moment, in that game/playoff season. Eli played at that level in the team's wins.

And also back to my original thought, I think Bradford has the physical tools to be that guy too. Just not conviced he's got it between the ears

 

[FRO]

Another topic the author touched on, no way Kobe or Lebron is better than Michael. No way.

 

[bluesjoc]

This has been analyzed as nauseam.

Here it is in a nutshell. Regardless, of how or why bad stuff happened to him....

Bradford has used up all of his sick days.

Yeah just look how the Lions dumped Stafford?

 

[max]

I disagree with the idea that there are Bradford lovers so much as there are Rams fans who are looking at the on field play and asking "Who is at fault for these results?" rather than simply looking at the record and blaming the QB.

I've defended Bradford a lot, but if I saw play where the QB was sucking despite adequate support, or if Shaun Hill or someone else was outplaying him, I'd have no issue calling for someone else.

What you just put forth is the generally perceived definition of the Bradford Lover.

The Bradford Lover says just look at the on field play and you can see that Bradford is a good QB.

And actually, the Bradford basher says just look at the on field play and you can see that Bradford is not a good QB. Heck, Mike Tanier put out that article complete with pics that just bashed the heck out of Bradford. And the Bradford bashers said, "see, there it is, Bradford stinks". And the Bradford lovers said, that article is so wrong.

The main point here is that Bradford is a very polarizing player. And I agree with that.