St. Louis Rams: Bringing Back Bradford?

[dieterbrock]

That's exactly the point. You can't even argue it. It's simple logical reasoning.
.

Bradford record 2011 1-9 .100 wp%
Backup record in 2011 1-5 .166 wp%

Bradford record in 2013 3-4 .428 wp%
Backup record in 2013 4-5 .444 wp%

No arguement

Same players, same scheme, same record

 

[jrry32]

Bradford record 2011 1-9 .100 wp%
Backup record in 2011 1-5 .166 wp%

2011 was just a crappy year all around. Bradford looked terrible. Coaches were terrible. Team was terrible. I really don't put much stock in it. If you do, that's your right but I think it's far too distant and Bradford isn't the same guy. He's played MUCH better football in 2012 and 2013. But yea, if we were talking about 2011 Bradford...I don't think this team would be any better. On the bright side, Sam Bradford has developed quite substantially since then as has the team around him.

Bradford record in 2013 3-4 .428 wp%
Backup record in 2013 4-5 .444 wp%

No arguement

Same players, same scheme, same record

No, that's the problem. It wasn't the same players and same scheme. You are conveniently ignoring that which is baffling to me because we both follow this team passionately. The offensive scheme changed radically after the first four games and our HB position changed radically.

Which led us to go from being the worst rushing team in the NFL over the first 4 games to a top 10-15 rushing attack in the NFL. With that scheme and rushing attack, the team was 2-1 under Bradford. Now, the wins came over the Jaguars and Texans so ultimately, we don't have enough of a sample size.

But please stop insulting my intelligence with these comparisons. We both know they aren't accurate. And I've already laid out why. I will repost it for you:
Bradford's 7 Starts
PPG Allowed - 26.3 PPG

Clemens's 9 Starts
PPG Allowed - 20.0 PPG

That's almost a TD per game better.

Here's another big one:
Bradford's 7 Starts
70.6 RYPG, 3.19 RYPC, 0 RTDs

Clemens's 9 Starts
139.8 RYPG, 4.64 RYPC, 10 RTDs

 

[Lesson]

Bradford record 2011 1-9 .100 wp%
Backup record in 2011 1-5 .166 wp%

Bradford record in 2013 3-4 .428 wp%
Backup record in 2013 4-5 .444 wp%

No arguement

Same players, same scheme, same record

Stacy didn't become the starter until Week 5 last season or whenever the team played the Jags. Up to that point, the run game was a black hole for the most part. Additionally, Fisher and Co. completely re-wrote the gameplan. The offense was not ran the same under Clemens as it was under Bradford. Furthermore, 2011 was a mess all around. And that situation was exacerbated with Bradford's ankle injury.

 

[dieterbrock]

But please stop insulting my intelligence with these comparisons. We both know they aren't accurate. And I've already laid out why. I will repost it for you:

They are entirely accurate, you just dont like what they tell you. And please spare me with the re-post, I can read.
The stat we are discussing is wins, and Sam hasnt proven that he can win more than his back ups. Its all right there for you.
But carry on, as I'm finding humor in your belief that with your statistical analysis, you can actually re-write history. Newsflash, you cant.
There is no "proving" Sam would have won more games, no matter how hard you try. As Parcells always said, you are what your record says you are

 

[CGI_Ram]

 

[Pancake]

Lets consider it logically, Dieter:
1. Is Bradford the better QB? If yes, go to Question 2.
2. Is the QB position an impact position in terms of wins and losses? If yes, go to Question 3.
3. Would the Rams win more games with Bradford?

I think all three answers are "yes". It's a simple logical approach. I don't see how you could conclude that the Rams would do worse with the better QB. And that's without ignoring all of the specific areas of play where Bradford outshines Davis and how the Rams have lost this year.

I don't think you're being very logical. Hell, even if you want to look purely at wins and losses(not a good measure of QB quality), Bradford is 8-12-1 over his last two season as a starter. Davis is 3-6 this year. And I don't think you'd make the argument that the 2012 and 2013 teams were as talented as this team.

While you may not have intended to discredit Bradford, it certainly has seemed like you are when you're arguing that the Rams wouldn't have performed better with him than a struggling backup QB.(just discussing perception, not making an accusation)

Bradford is a 4 year vet and had millions invested in his development. Davis has had virtually nothing close to that. Bradford looks the part and has all the physical tools that Davis does not but Bradford hasn't really done a significantly better job than anyone who has replaced him in the lineup. I am a little pessimistic about the difference Bradford would make too. I don't think he's shown enough for me to start penciling in wins. If it was Warner or Manning or Brees or Brady I could see what your saying as being the logical conclusion but it's not that cut and dry at all.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Bradford is a 4 year vet and had millions invested in his development. Davis has had virtually nothing close to that. Bradford looks the part and has all the physical tools that Davis does not but Bradford hasn't really done a significantly better job than anyone who has replaced him in the lineup. I am a little pessimistic about the difference Bradford would make too. I don't think he's shown enough for me to start penciling in wins. If it was Warner or Manning or Brees or Brady I could see what your saying as being the logical conclusion but it's not that cut and dry at all.

I dunno.

59TD to 38INT on some really bad teams.

Not sure how you're setting the bar because he's not played much since the team has improved.

 

[jrry32]

Bradford is a 4 year vet and had millions invested in his development. Davis has had virtually nothing close to that. Bradford looks the part and has all the physical tools that Davis does not but Bradford hasn't really done a significantly better job than anyone who has replaced him in the lineup. I am a little pessimistic about the difference Bradford would make too. I don't think he's shown enough for me to start penciling in wins. If it was Warner or Manning or Brees or Brady I could see what your saying as being the logical conclusion but it's not that cut and dry at all.

Maybe if the extent of your analysis is looking at wins and losses.

Bradford - 14 TDs to 4 Ints in 7 starts in 2013
Clemens - 8 TDs to 7 Ints in 9 starts in 2013
Davis - 12 TDs to 9 Ints in 9 starts in 2014

I think that says quite a lot.

I can sit here and argue all day with this but the simple point for me is this, if you can't see the difference between Bradford's play and the play of guys like Clemens and Davis...there's no middle ground. We have nothing to discuss. Because our opinions are so greatly different that it'll only result in a bunch of bickering with no progress.

 

[jrry32]

They are entirely accurate, you just dont like what they tell you. And please spare me with the re-post, I can read.
The stat we are discussing is wins, and Sam hasnt proven that he can win more than his back ups. Its all right there for you.
But carry on, as I'm finding humor in your belief that with your statistical analysis, you can actually re-write history. Newsflash, you cant.
There is no "proving" Sam would have won more games, no matter how hard you try. As Parcells always said, you are what your record says you are

On second thought, this just isn't going anywhere. Have a nice day.

 

[jrry32]

I dunno.

59TD to 38INT on some really bad teams.

Not sure how you're setting the bar because he's not played much since the team has improved.

35 TDs to 17 Ints in 23 games under Fisher. 27 TDs to 11 Ints in his last 16 starts(full season) as a starter.

Yet, I'm getting arguments that Bradford couldn't help this team gain an additional win or two over what Davis has brought us.

 

[kurtfaulk]

You are conveniently ignoring that which is baffling to me because we both follow this team passionately.

because all he wants to do is rag on bradford. why waste your energy on someone who only looks at wins and losses?

.

 

[Pancake]

Maybe if the extent of your analysis is looking at wins and losses.

Bradford - 14 TDs to 4 Ints in 7 starts in 2013
Clemens - 8 TDs to 7 Ints in 9 starts in 2013
Davis - 12 TDs to 9 Ints in 9 starts in 2014

I think that says quite a lot.

I can sit here and argue all day with this but the simple point for me is this, if you can't see the difference between Bradford's play and the play of guys like Clemens and Davis...there's no middle ground. We have nothing to discuss. Because our opinions are so greatly different that it'll only result in a bunch of bickering with no progress.

I doubt that would happen Jrry32 because I'm not so invested in being right that I care enough to bicker. More importantly I respect X and the other guys who run the board enough to not go down that road. So yah we probably don't agree but that's ok with me. I'd still have a beer with ya.

 

[jrry32]

I doubt that would happen Jrry32 because I'm not so invested in being right that I care enough to bicker. More importantly I respect X and the other guys who run the board enough to not go down that road. So yah we probably don't agree but that's ok with me. I'd still have a beer with ya.

What type of beer? This is an important question.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I can see and understand both viewpoints and arguments.
I was starting to see some of the progression and positive things from Bradford's 7 games last season, and even before that in 2012. Bradford's style suits what Fisher and co want from the QB position. A smart QB who knows the offense inside and out, can make the easy throws and the tough throws...hand off the ball, and NOT MAKE MISTAKES. These A.Davis turnovers have got be absolutely killing Fisher inside.

Still, i understand what Dieter is saying and i agree...this game is about results...wins. The talent around Sam(WR's/OLine) has gone from next to nothing to some talent to decent talent to what we see today. I see an average OLine and good talent at WR today. That has to be recognized, but at the same time...as the talent has increased, Sam's reliability has decreased.

Personally i agree with those who believe that with Sam at QB this season we beat Dallas, AZ and SF and are likely sitting at 6-3(5-4 worst case scenario) and would be tied for 2nd place with Seattle....but there are many variables that work for both arguments. Sam has not put it all together yet. I say that based upon the win-loss totals under his watch. It's a fact that Sam throws TD's and not a lot of INT's. He makes plays and also leave's plays on the field.
28 TD's to only 17 INT's since working under Shotty....as opposed to 24 TD's to 21 INT's his first two seasons. You guys already posted the win %.

When Sam went down last season i saw an entire team elevate it's play. Not because Clemens was better than Sam. They rallied around the backup and they played inconsistent football.
Clemens fumbled 7 times and lost 4 of them. He threw 7 INT's. That's 11 turnovers in 9.5 games to go along with 8 TD's. Yuck.
Turnovers hurt our chances in the win column last season. I believe turnovers are killing this offense again...turnovers from another backup QB.

The team rallied a bit around Davis, but now as the defense has come around late(again)and Davis gets schemed out, we are what the record says we are. Two seasons in a row now...Just another high effort, young 4th place team with talent all over the roster, but nothing at QB. Sam isn't available and that's on him. Harsh but true.

Sorry fellas, i rambled away a bit there. My opinion is that yes...THIS team and last years team ARE better in the win-loss column with Bradford at QB, but that can't be proven with numbers or scenarios.

Go Rams.

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

Sam Bradford has 59 TDs to 38 PI's - some folks here really need to meditate on that considering all the utter crap the guy has had to deal with.

Jesus
Joseph &
Mary

Some Rams fans are...