Venturi on Frank Cignetti and Bradford

[JdashSTL]

I feel like we are screwing up his development with this stuff. We were all excited about it, but hiring Josh McDaniels was a terrible decision in hindsight.

I think we can look back on it and say that in a lockout year it was a bad decision to gamble on a OC with a different system and not hire someone very familiar with the WCO, and when we brought McD in we didnt make any changes to the offensive staff. Maybe that was an issue as well. When we signed Lloyd, he was the only offensive player we acquired that had a history with McD's offense.

Another thing we have to factor in is all the injuries. Maybe the offense looks a lot better with a healthy Amendola. That was a HUGE loss. He was Bradfords "security blanket." He led the team in catches Bradfords rookie year. Mark Clayton never came back 100% healthy. After them, were down to DX, Gibson, and 2 rookies. Salas goes on IR, DX was limited because of his injury concerns. Our TEs were a big disappointment. We lost our starting OTs. We ended up playing quite a few guys that werent here in training camp towards the end of the season. There were plenty of occasions where I was pissed at McDs play-calling, but I cant assume that we would have the same issues next season if he stayed. Id like to think there would be massive improvement.

 

[-X-]

I feel like we are screwing up his development with this stuff. We were all excited about it, but hiring Josh McDaniels was a terrible decision in hindsight.

I think we can look back on it and say that in a lockout year it was a bad decision to gamble on a OC with a different system and not hire someone very familiar with the WCO, and when we brought McD in we didnt make any changes to the offensive staff. Maybe that was an issue as well. When we signed Lloyd, he was the only offensive player we acquired that had a history with McD's offense.

Another thing we have to factor in is all the injuries. Maybe the offense looks a lot better with a healthy Amendola. That was a HUGE loss. He was Bradfords "security blanket." He led the team in catches Bradfords rookie year. Mark Clayton never came back 100% healthy. After them, were down to DX, Gibson, and 2 rookies. Salas goes on IR, DX was limited because of his injury concerns. Our TEs were a big disappointment. We lost our starting OTs. We ended up playing quite a few guys that werent here in training camp towards the end of the season. There were plenty of occasions where I was pissed at McDs play-calling, but I cant assume that we would have the same issues next season if he stayed. Id like to think there would be massive improvement.

I agree with all that. IF McDaniels had stayed, there definitely would have been some improvement. I was kind of taking that for granted too. My only concern with that would have been the fact that he was inevitably going to leave the following year (per his contract), and there was nobody being groomed to be his replacement. As you said, too many things went awry for there to be any real objective critique of his performance. Everybody had a difficult time adjusting to those things.

Anyway, there appears to be some chemistry and familiarity building with the offensive assistants, so there's a good chance that if Brian Schottenheimer leaves, there will already be someone in place who is very familiar with what it is he does, and there will be a smooth transition into the next offense. That, of course, is of pivotal importance to the continued development and maturation of Bradford.

 

[Anonymous]

I feel like we are screwing up his development with this stuff. We were all excited about it, but hiring Josh McDaniels was a terrible decision in hindsight.

I think we can look back on it and say that in a lockout year it was a bad decision to gamble on a OC with a different system and not hire someone very familiar with the WCO, and when we brought McD in we didnt make any changes to the offensive staff. Maybe that was an issue as well. When we signed Lloyd, he was the only offensive player we acquired that had a history with McD's offense.

Another thing we have to factor in is all the injuries. Maybe the offense looks a lot better with a healthy Amendola. That was a HUGE loss. He was Bradfords "security blanket." He led the team in catches Bradfords rookie year. Mark Clayton never came back 100% healthy. After them, were down to DX, Gibson, and 2 rookies. Salas goes on IR, DX was limited because of his injury concerns. Our TEs were a big disappointment. We lost our starting OTs. We ended up playing quite a few guys that werent here in training camp towards the end of the season. There were plenty of occasions where I was pissed at McDs play-calling, but I cant assume that we would have the same issues next season if he stayed. Id like to think there would be massive improvement.

All true, and, Bradford still has things he needs to work on and Venturi, at least, sorts through all the static to name a couple of them.

What's wrong with saying Bradford has things he has to work on regardless what went on around him.

It would be surprising if he didn't, right?

Plus of course most of the Venturi bit above is enthusiasm for the new qb coach. That;s a positive. I am not sure why that got lost just because he has some ordinary "what do you expect" critical assessments of a young qb.

 

[Faceplant]

Not sure why people feel the need to blame everyone and everything else on Bradfords lack of success last year. Sure there were obstacles, and nobody is denying that, but as ZN stated, there are obvious holes in his game that need improvement. Again, this should be expected from a QB with less than 2 full seasons under his belt. I have confidence that Sam can and will improve this year as long as he is coached well and is able to grasp the system quickly. Oh, and some WR and OL help would obviously go a long way towards helping in that regard.....

 

[JdashSTL]

Not sure why people feel the need to blame everyone and everything else on Bradfords lack of success last year. Sure there were obstacles, and nobody is denying that, but as ZN stated, there are obvious holes in his game that need improvement. Again, this should be expected from a QB with less than 2 full seasons under his belt. I have confidence that Sam can and will improve this year as long as he is coached well and is able to grasp the system quickly. Oh, and some WR and OL help would obviously go a long way towards helping in that regard.....

Im not trying to place all the blame on the injuries, talent, and poor performance around Bradford on offense. All of those things were a factor. Bradford couldnt overcome that. There were times where I didnt like his body language, I didnt like when he stared down WRs, he probably should have had more INTS. We didnt get to see the progression we hoped to see. Still doesnt change my confidence in him and my expectations.

 

[-X-]

Not sure why people feel the need to blame everyone and everything else on Bradfords lack of success last year. Sure there were obstacles, and nobody is denying that, but as ZN stated, there are obvious holes in his game that need improvement. Again, this should be expected from a QB with less than 2 full seasons under his belt. I have confidence that Sam can and will improve this year as long as he is coached well and is able to grasp the system quickly. Oh, and some WR and OL help would obviously go a long way towards helping in that regard.....

Im not trying to place all the blame on the injuries, talent, and poor performance around Bradford on offense. All of those things were a factor. Bradford couldnt overcome that. There were times where I didnt like his body language, I didnt like when he stared down WRs, he probably should have had more INTS. We didnt get to see the progression we hoped to see. Still doesnt change my confidence in him and my expectations.

I think we all agree that Bradford isn't a hall-of-fame QB at this point, and that he was a sophomore QB who missed a lot of time in his THIRD offense, which subsequently stunted his development. To your point about how there should have been more ints, though, I think the reason why there weren't more is BECAUSE of his reluctance to throw into difficult situations. Seemed to me that he was acutely aware of routes that would have resulted in possible interceptions, and that may have caused him to hold onto the ball longer than necessary. Just my opinion of course.

 

[Anonymous]

HELLO

HIGH
ANKLE
SPRAIN

He's still recovering from it.

Venturi knows that.

But there was a period before the sprain when he revealed he had some issues.

cruddy O-line and crap WRs might preclude getting comfy with the 7 step drop too.

Those things happened too but it wasn't just that.

I mean he's not perfect. He's still too much of a project to be perfect, So he will have some flaws. That was clearly visible. So why not be honest about where he stands as a project. This is way beyond the whole basher/apologist dynamic...it's just a matter of trying to be objective about the guy.
.

Do you realize you called Sam Bradford, the Rams #1 OVERALL pick in the 2010 draft a "project" twice?

BEWARE THE SHITSTORM!
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

 

[DR RAM]

HELLO

HIGH
ANKLE
SPRAIN

He's still recovering from it.

Venturi knows that.

But there was a period before the sprain when he revealed he had some issues.

cruddy O-line and crap WRs might preclude getting comfy with the 7 step drop too.

Those things happened too but it wasn't just that.

I mean he's not perfect. He's still too much of a project to be perfect, So he will have some flaws. That was clearly visible. So why not be honest about where he stands as a project. This is way beyond the whole basher/apologist dynamic...it's just a matter of trying to be objective about the guy.
.

Do you realize you called Sam Bradford, the Rams #1 OVERALL pick in the 2010 draft a "project" twice?

BEWARE THE SHITSTORM!
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

I'm sure he realizes it, just as he realized he said Sam has flaws several times.
.
I don't think one expert in the game would say that Bradford is a project.

Every QB has things to work on, that is a given. Rookie year, a mobile Sam, moved pretty well and throws the ball well on the run. There were brand new things that Sam learned last year in a shortened season, both preseason and regular season for him. I don't see any flaws, I don't see him as a project. I saw him as a 2nd year QB in his second offense that still had things to learn and still had things to improve on.

We will see that again this year in a new offense, he will be asked to do things that he has NEVER done before on a consistent basis. I'm not worried, he has all the tools to do that, mentally and physically. There will be a learning curve, having to learn your craft and having to learn a new offense at the same time isn't all cake. He probably won't have a great season, this is a rebuilding year. There will be lots of changes on the line, and changes at WR.

 

[Anonymous]

HELLO

HIGH
ANKLE
SPRAIN

He's still recovering from it.

Venturi knows that.

But there was a period before the sprain when he revealed he had some issues.

cruddy O-line and crap WRs might preclude getting comfy with the 7 step drop too.

Those things happened too but it wasn't just that.

I mean he's not perfect. He's still too much of a project to be perfect, So he will have some flaws. That was clearly visible. So why not be honest about where he stands as a project. This is way beyond the whole basher/apologist dynamic...it's just a matter of trying to be objective about the guy.
.

Do you realize you called Sam Bradford, the Rams #1 OVERALL pick in the 2010 draft a "project" twice?

BEWARE THE shytestorm!
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

I'm sure he realizes it, just as he realized he said Sam has flaws several times.
.
I don't think one expert in the game would say that Bradford is a project.

Every QB has things to work on, that is a given. Rookie year, a mobile Sam, moved pretty well and throws the ball well on the run. There were brand new things that Sam learned last year in a shortened season, both preseason and regular season for him. I don't see any flaws, I don't see him as a project. I saw him as a 2nd year QB in his second offense that still had things to learn and still had things to improve on.

We will see that again this year in a new offense, he will be asked to do things that he has NEVER done before on a consistent basis. I'm not worried, he has all the tools to do that, mentally and physically. There will be a learning curve, having to learn your craft and having to learn a new offense at the same time isn't all cake. He probably won't have a great season, this is a rebuilding year. There will be lots of changes on the line, and changes at WR.

That's it, let it be forever known that squeaky has taken all the heat off the word "project". Every last freaking degree F, degree celsius, BTU, calorie, scoville, etc.
issed: issed: issed: issed: issed:

 

[JdashSTL]

Not sure why people feel the need to blame everyone and everything else on Bradfords lack of success last year. Sure there were obstacles, and nobody is denying that, but as ZN stated, there are obvious holes in his game that need improvement. Again, this should be expected from a QB with less than 2 full seasons under his belt. I have confidence that Sam can and will improve this year as long as he is coached well and is able to grasp the system quickly. Oh, and some WR and OL help would obviously go a long way towards helping in that regard.....

Im not trying to place all the blame on the injuries, talent, and poor performance around Bradford on offense. All of those things were a factor. Bradford couldnt overcome that. There were times where I didnt like his body language, I didnt like when he stared down WRs, he probably should have had more INTS. We didnt get to see the progression we hoped to see. Still doesnt change my confidence in him and my expectations.

I think we all agree that Bradford isn't a hall-of-fame QB at this point, and that he was a sophomore QB who missed a lot of time in his THIRD offense, which subsequently stunted his development. To your point about how there should have been more ints, though, I think the reason why there weren't more is BECAUSE of his reluctance to throw into difficult situations. Seemed to me that he was acutely aware of routes that would have resulted in possible interceptions, and that may have caused him to hold onto the ball longer than necessary. Just my opinion of course.

And thats where I wish we could look at the all-22 tape to see the WRs run their routes and see which ones got open. The injury also made things really tough on him the couple games he played after it happened. He was fairly mobile before that. This was the year of the high ankle sprain lol. All we had to do was watch Big Ben and Gronk to get a pretty good idea of what Bradford was going through.

 

[Anonymous]

HELLO

HIGH
ANKLE
SPRAIN

He's still recovering from it.

Venturi knows that.

But there was a period before the sprain when he revealed he had some issues.

cruddy O-line and crap WRs might preclude getting comfy with the 7 step drop too.

Those things happened too but it wasn't just that.

I mean he's not perfect. He's still too much of a project to be perfect, So he will have some flaws. That was clearly visible. So why not be honest about where he stands as a project. This is way beyond the whole basher/apologist dynamic...it's just a matter of trying to be objective about the guy.
.

Do you realize you called Sam Bradford, the Rams #1 OVERALL pick in the 2010 draft a "project" twice?

BEWARE THE shytestorm!
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

I'm sure he realizes it, just as he realized he said Sam has flaws several times.
.
I don't think one expert in the game would say that Bradford is a project.

Every QB has things to work on, that is a given. Rookie year, a mobile Sam, moved pretty well and throws the ball well on the run. There were brand new things that Sam learned last year in a shortened season, both preseason and regular season for him. I don't see any flaws, I don't see him as a project. I saw him as a 2nd year QB in his second offense that still had things to learn and still had things to improve on.

We will see that again this year in a new offense, he will be asked to do things that he has NEVER done before on a consistent basis. I'm not worried, he has all the tools to do that, mentally and physically. There will be a learning curve, having to learn your craft and having to learn a new offense at the same time isn't all cake. He probably won't have a great season, this is a rebuilding year. There will be lots of changes on the line, and changes at WR.

No, I meant what I said, or rather I meant what I meant, which is why I called him a project. I don't mean "project" in the sense that J. Smith was so I see why people "dispute" the word, but absolutely he is not an developed full-NFL ready qb yet. I mean, it's a nice problem to have, cause he's a good one. Nor is this simply a matter of all qbs having things they need to work on. It's more than and different from that.

But he is not a finished product. He himself said at the end of 2010 that he had to learn about pre-snap reads and going through progressions. There's things he is not good at yet and never had to do before. True, the McD offense exposed him too much at this stage of his development and frankly that's on McD. McD used him in ways that frankly hurt him as much as anything. Last year just didn't move him forward much when it comes to that.

Everyone, Venturi down to me, is aware of the injuries and of the general regression on offense around him. That can be sorted out and you can see things that go to the qb alone. A lot of it--and Venturi is dead right about this--comes from being in that spread in college. That just means he has a lot of things to adapt to in the NFL.

I don't know how much he will develop this off-season and how much Cignetti will help stabilize things, but yes he absolutely has flaws in his game that come from being young and not fully in sync with the pro game yet. It would be surprising if he didn't, frankly. And, again, if he were in this thread, he would agree.

Will he mature as a qb this year? Or next year? It IS only a question of when, because everything everyone quite rightly points out about his limitations is either coachable or gets fixed with experience. Though having said that I don't know what his ceiling is. I expect him to be good but I don;t know yet about elite (not that a team needs an elite qb--just a very good one).

We don't need to name all the strengths, right, cause we all see them. Right? Cause I see all this unexpected debate as a matter of magnifying small differences.

The ONE THING I want most to see is the Eli factor...I want to see him play well when behind in a game that can be won.

I actually think all of this is completely obvious and non-controversial. I am a little taken aback, in fact, that ordinary realism like this gets responded to in a way one would normally expect would happen to outright bashers on the PD board. EVERYONE here is FAR from being a PD-board style basher.

If nothing else, just respect the fact that it is possible to see these things differently. I know a lot of people want to act like he has arrived as a pro qb and was just let down by things around him. That's not what I saw and I can't think of any professional analyst who agreed with that. But, still, there's a range of views on things like this. That's what makes for good discussion, right?

 

[DR RAM]

HELLO

HIGH
ANKLE
SPRAIN

He's still recovering from it.

Venturi knows that.

But there was a period before the sprain when he revealed he had some issues.

cruddy O-line and crap WRs might preclude getting comfy with the 7 step drop too.

Those things happened too but it wasn't just that.

I mean he's not perfect. He's still too much of a project to be perfect, So he will have some flaws. That was clearly visible. So why not be honest about where he stands as a project. This is way beyond the whole basher/apologist dynamic...it's just a matter of trying to be objective about the guy.
.

Do you realize you called Sam Bradford, the Rams #1 OVERALL pick in the 2010 draft a "project" twice?

BEWARE THE shytestorm!
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

I'm sure he realizes it, just as he realized he said Sam has flaws several times.
.
I don't think one expert in the game would say that Bradford is a project.

Every QB has things to work on, that is a given. Rookie year, a mobile Sam, moved pretty well and throws the ball well on the run. There were brand new things that Sam learned last year in a shortened season, both preseason and regular season for him. I don't see any flaws, I don't see him as a project. I saw him as a 2nd year QB in his second offense that still had things to learn and still had things to improve on.

We will see that again this year in a new offense, he will be asked to do things that he has NEVER done before on a consistent basis. I'm not worried, he has all the tools to do that, mentally and physically. There will be a learning curve, having to learn your craft and having to learn a new offense at the same time isn't all cake. He probably won't have a great season, this is a rebuilding year. There will be lots of changes on the line, and changes at WR.

No, I would call him a project. I mean, it's a nice problem to have, cause he's a good one. I don't mean "project" in the sense that J. Smith was. But he is not a finished product. He himself said at the end of 2010 that he had to learn about pre-snap reads and going through progressions. The McD offense exposed him too much at this stage of his development and frankly that's on McD. McD used him in ways that frankly hurt him as much as anything.

Everyone, Venturi down to me, is aware of the injuries and of the general regression on offense around him. That can be sorted out and you can see things that go to the qb alone. A lot of it--and Venturi is dead right about this--comes from being in that spread in college. That just means he has a lot of things to adapt to in the NFL. Last year just didn't move him forward much when it comes to that.

I don't know how much he will develop this off-season and how much Cignetti will help stabilize things, but yes he absolutely has flaws in his game that come from being young and not fully in sync with the pro game yet. Will he mature as a qb this year? Or next year? It IS only a question of when, because everything everyone quite rightly points out about his limitations is either coachable or gets fixed with experience.

We don't need to name all the strengths, right, cause we all see them.

The ONE THING I want most to see is the Eli factor...I want to see him play well when behind in a game that can be won.

I actually think all of this is completely obvious and non-controversial. I am a little taken aback, in fact, that ordinary realism like this gets responded to in a way one would normally expect would happen to outright bashers on the PD board. EVERYONE here is FAR from being a PD-board style basher.

I know a lot of people want to act like he has arrived as a pro qb and was just let down by things around him. That's not what I saw and I can't think of any professional analyst who agreed wiIf nothing else, just respect the fact that it is possible to see these things differently.th that. But, still, there's a range of views on things like this. That's what makes for good discussion, right?

I don't think we ALL see his strengths or weaknesses, and I don't know why you want to tell people what they can or can't debate upon. You just want to talk about his weaknesses...but you want a good debate. Doesn't work like that.

YOU are the only one saying that or painting this as controversial. Your ordinary realism is your opinion. You chose words in a style that we don't throw around here, like a fisherman chums the water. Nobody bashed you, so just stop it.

Name one person on here who thought he arrived as a vet QB.

I agreed that he has lots of things to work on. I think everyone agrees on this.

 

[Anonymous]

Name one person on here who thought he arrived as a vet QB.

I agreed that he has lots of things to work on. I think everyone agrees on this.

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb. But if you agree he's young and developing, then, where's the disagreement. Or the "need to correct someone" (quotation marks in that case doesn't indicate someone being quoted.)

I don't see a lot of people agreeing he has things to work on. I think there's controversy when there's responses indicating there's controversy. And I didn't say there shouldn't BE controversy, just that I didn't get why there was in this case.

If you want to say this was one harmonious thread full of nothing but benign and bland agreement, then, all I can say that's not what I saw. Not that it was old-fashioned PD style open warfare...on the other hand what does it matter. If you "correct" me so I end up saying only what you say and/or how you say it, what would be gained? People can see things differently. Right?

I just think Venturi is spot on. I am surprised anyone had any response to it except pure agreement. But then, yeah, people see things differently.

 

[DR RAM]

Name one person on here who thought he arrived as a vet QB.

I agreed that he has lots of things to work on. I think everyone agrees on this.

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb. But if you agree he's young and developing, then, where's the controversy.

I don't see a lot of people agreeing he has things to work on. I see a lot of people getting upset because someone said that. I think they are so PD-traumatized they see bashing where there's actually just realists all disagreeing on minor details.

I think there's controversy when there's responses indicating there's controversy.

If you want to say this was one harmonious thread full of nothing but benign and bland agreement, then, all I can say that's not what I saw.

On the other hand what does it matter. If you "correct" me so I end up saying only what you say, what would be gained? Everything I say is defensible and legitimate and no one HAS to agree with it. Any more than they HAVE TO agree with my view of the thread. People can see things differently. Right?

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb.

So you didn't say this?

"I know a lot of people want to act like he has arrived as a pro qb and was just let down by things around him."

If I constructed a poll and it said...."Do you think Bradford has things he needs to work on?" I would bet that 100% of people here would say that he does. 100%.

I don't want you to say what I say, but I don't want you to bash our coaches or players, or bait our posters. Saying Sam is a project and has a lot of flaws, that wording, is the problem.

I really don't care how you see Bradford. Other see him differently. I would bet that each of us see him differently.

 

[Anonymous]

Name one person on here who thought he arrived as a vet QB.

I agreed that he has lots of things to work on. I think everyone agrees on this.

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb. But if you agree he's young and developing, then, where's the controversy.

I don't see a lot of people agreeing he has things to work on. I see a lot of people getting upset because someone said that. I think they are so PD-traumatized they see bashing where there's actually just realists all disagreeing on minor details.

I think there's controversy when there's responses indicating there's controversy.

If you want to say this was one harmonious thread full of nothing but benign and bland agreement, then, all I can say that's not what I saw.

On the other hand what does it matter. If you "correct" me so I end up saying only what you say, what would be gained? Everything I say is defensible and legitimate and no one HAS to agree with it. Any more than they HAVE TO agree with my view of the thread. People can see things differently. Right?

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb.

So you didn't say this?

"I know a lot of people want to act like he has arrived as a pro qb and was just let down by things around him."

If I constructed a poll and it said...."Do you think Bradford has things he needs to work on?" I would bet that 100% of people here would say that he does. 100%.

I don't want you to say what I say, but I don't want you to bash our coaches or players, or bait our posters. Saying Sam is a project and has a lot of flaws, that wording, is the problem.

I really don't care how you see Bradford. Other see him differently. I would bet that each of us see him differently.

No one bashed anyone. Which is my point.

There is nothing wrong with that wording. It is not bashing. It's not remotely "bashing." We just disagree on the extent to which he is developing. And that's all.

I don't want disagreements like that taken as "bashing." I think it paints me into a corner and dampens discussion. Better just to debate what people mean by development, and project, and so on.

Never in my life of posting have I ever seen the word "project" as bashing. I think of it as a neutral assessment people can agree with, disagree with, discuss, debate.

I don't bash. I have never done that. On any board. I am proud of being part of the big camp of realists out there.

On "vet qb"--yeah, I said that as a toss-off remark and then spaced it. But that wasn't aimed at any particular person or poster--that mentality does exist though. Probably there could be a better way to say it.

 

[DR RAM]

Name one person on here who thought he arrived as a vet QB.

I agreed that he has lots of things to work on. I think everyone agrees on this.

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb. But if you agree he's young and developing, then, where's the controversy.

I don't see a lot of people agreeing he has things to work on. I see a lot of people getting upset because someone said that. I think they are so PD-traumatized they see bashing where there's actually just realists all disagreeing on minor details.

I think there's controversy when there's responses indicating there's controversy.

If you want to say this was one harmonious thread full of nothing but benign and bland agreement, then, all I can say that's not what I saw.

On the other hand what does it matter. If you "correct" me so I end up saying only what you say, what would be gained? Everything I say is defensible and legitimate and no one HAS to agree with it. Any more than they HAVE TO agree with my view of the thread. People can see things differently. Right?

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb.

So you didn't say this?

"I know a lot of people want to act like he has arrived as a pro qb and was just let down by things around him."

If I constructed a poll and it said...."Do you think Bradford has things he needs to work on?" I would bet that 100% of people here would say that he does. 100%.

I don't want you to say what I say, but I don't want you to bash our coaches or players, or bait our posters. Saying Sam is a project and has a lot of flaws, that wording, is the problem.

I really don't care how you see Bradford. Other see him differently. I would bet that each of us see him differently.

No one bashed anyone. Which is my point.

There is nothing wrong with that wording. It is not bashing. It's not remotely "bashing." We just disagree on the extent to which he is developing. And that's all.

I don't want disagreements like that taken as "bashing." I think it paints me into a corner and dampens discussion. Better just to debate what people mean by development, and project, and so on.

Never in my life of posting have I ever seen the word "project" as bashing. I think of it as a neutral assessment people can agree with, disagree with, discuss, debate.

I don't bash. I have never done that. On any board. I am proud of being part of the big camp of realists out there.

On "vet qb"--yeah, I said that as a toss-off remark and then spaced it. But that wasn't aimed at any particular person or poster--that mentality does exist though. Probably there could be a better way to say it.

That's all I'm saying...there's a better way to say things, and I think you know that. You had already expressed yourself several times about how you feel about Bradford in this thread alone, before you reverted to those chosen words. We don't do that here. I am not going to debate about it.

 

[Anonymous]

Name one person on here who thought he arrived as a vet QB.

I agreed that he has lots of things to work on. I think everyone agrees on this.

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb. But if you agree he's young and developing, then, where's the controversy.

I don't see a lot of people agreeing he has things to work on. I see a lot of people getting upset because someone said that. I think they are so PD-traumatized they see bashing where there's actually just realists all disagreeing on minor details.

I think there's controversy when there's responses indicating there's controversy.

If you want to say this was one harmonious thread full of nothing but benign and bland agreement, then, all I can say that's not what I saw.

On the other hand what does it matter. If you "correct" me so I end up saying only what you say, what would be gained? Everything I say is defensible and legitimate and no one HAS to agree with it. Any more than they HAVE TO agree with my view of the thread. People can see things differently. Right?

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb.

So you didn't say this?

"I know a lot of people want to act like he has arrived as a pro qb and was just let down by things around him."

If I constructed a poll and it said...."Do you think Bradford has things he needs to work on?" I would bet that 100% of people here would say that he does. 100%.

I don't want you to say what I say, but I don't want you to bash our coaches or players, or bait our posters. Saying Sam is a project and has a lot of flaws, that wording, is the problem.

I really don't care how you see Bradford. Other see him differently. I would bet that each of us see him differently.

No one bashed anyone. Which is my point.

There is nothing wrong with that wording. It is not bashing. It's not remotely "bashing." We just disagree on the extent to which he is developing. And that's all.

I don't want disagreements like that taken as "bashing." I think it paints me into a corner and dampens discussion. Better just to debate what people mean by development, and project, and so on.

Never in my life of posting have I ever seen the word "project" as bashing. I think of it as a neutral assessment people can agree with, disagree with, discuss, debate.

I don't bash. I have never done that. On any board. I am proud of being part of the big camp of realists out there.

Regarding the use of the word "project" I agree.

 

[Anonymous]

Name one person on here who thought he arrived as a vet QB.

I agreed that he has lots of things to work on. I think everyone agrees on this.

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb. But if you agree he's young and developing, then, where's the controversy.

I don't see a lot of people agreeing he has things to work on. I see a lot of people getting upset because someone said that. I think they are so PD-traumatized they see bashing where there's actually just realists all disagreeing on minor details.

I think there's controversy when there's responses indicating there's controversy.

If you want to say this was one harmonious thread full of nothing but benign and bland agreement, then, all I can say that's not what I saw.

On the other hand what does it matter. If you "correct" me so I end up saying only what you say, what would be gained? Everything I say is defensible and legitimate and no one HAS to agree with it. Any more than they HAVE TO agree with my view of the thread. People can see things differently. Right?

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb.

So you didn't say this?

"I know a lot of people want to act like he has arrived as a pro qb and was just let down by things around him."

If I constructed a poll and it said...."Do you think Bradford has things he needs to work on?" I would bet that 100% of people here would say that he does. 100%.

I don't want you to say what I say, but I don't want you to bash our coaches or players, or bait our posters. Saying Sam is a project and has a lot of flaws, that wording, is the problem.

I really don't care how you see Bradford. Other see him differently. I would bet that each of us see him differently.

No one bashed anyone. Which is my point.

There is nothing wrong with that wording. It is not bashing. It's not remotely "bashing." We just disagree on the extent to which he is developing. And that's all.

I don't want disagreements like that taken as "bashing." I think it paints me into a corner and dampens discussion. Better just to debate what people mean by development, and project, and so on.

Never in my life of posting have I ever seen the word "project" as bashing. I think of it as a neutral assessment people can agree with, disagree with, discuss, debate.

I don't bash. I have never done that. On any board. I am proud of being part of the big camp of realists out there.

On "vet qb"--yeah, I said that as a toss-off remark and then spaced it. But that wasn't aimed at any particular person or poster--that mentality does exist though. Probably there could be a better way to say it.

That's all I'm saying...there's a better way to say things, and I think you know that. You had already expressed yourself several times about how you feel about Bradford in this thread alone, before you reverted to those chosen words. We don't do that here. I am not going to debate about it.

No. Actually. I didn't think that was bad when I said it. So let's not try to calculate my motives. In hindsight I saw that certain phrasing didn't work in these circumstances HERE given what I was trying to say but I don't think I said anything "bad." So often I don't know the tolerances and protocols here till they're pointed out--and in fact, they are unusual here and cannot be guessed at, sometimes. I don't mind being called on stuff because it's your board and your rules. But I always intend to be an honest and forthright poster here. It is always better to operate with that assumption about all posters, right?

 

[DR RAM]

Name one person on here who thought he arrived as a vet QB.

I agreed that he has lots of things to work on. I think everyone agrees on this.

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb. But if you agree he's young and developing, then, where's the controversy.

I don't see a lot of people agreeing he has things to work on. I see a lot of people getting upset because someone said that. I think they are so PD-traumatized they see bashing where there's actually just realists all disagreeing on minor details.

I think there's controversy when there's responses indicating there's controversy.

If you want to say this was one harmonious thread full of nothing but benign and bland agreement, then, all I can say that's not what I saw.

On the other hand what does it matter. If you "correct" me so I end up saying only what you say, what would be gained? Everything I say is defensible and legitimate and no one HAS to agree with it. Any more than they HAVE TO agree with my view of the thread. People can see things differently. Right?

I didn't say anyone said he arrived as a vet qb.

So you didn't say this?

"I know a lot of people want to act like he has arrived as a pro qb and was just let down by things around him."

If I constructed a poll and it said...."Do you think Bradford has things he needs to work on?" I would bet that 100% of people here would say that he does. 100%.

I don't want you to say what I say, but I don't want you to bash our coaches or players, or bait our posters. Saying Sam is a project and has a lot of flaws, that wording, is the problem.

I really don't care how you see Bradford. Other see him differently. I would bet that each of us see him differently.

No one bashed anyone. Which is my point.

There is nothing wrong with that wording. It is not bashing. It's not remotely "bashing." We just disagree on the extent to which he is developing. And that's all.

I don't want disagreements like that taken as "bashing." I think it paints me into a corner and dampens discussion. Better just to debate what people mean by development, and project, and so on.

Never in my life of posting have I ever seen the word "project" as bashing. I think of it as a neutral assessment people can agree with, disagree with, discuss, debate.

I don't bash. I have never done that. On any board. I am proud of being part of the big camp of realists out there.

On "vet qb"--yeah, I said that as a toss-off remark and then spaced it. But that wasn't aimed at any particular person or poster--that mentality does exist though. Probably there could be a better way to say it.

That's all I'm saying...there's a better way to say things, and I think you know that. You had already expressed yourself several times about how you feel about Bradford in this thread alone, before you reverted to those chosen words. We don't do that here. I am not going to debate about it.

No. Actually. I didn't think that was bad when I said it. So let's not try to calculate my motives. In hindsight I saw that certain phrasing didn't work in these circumstances HERE given what I was trying to say but I don't think I said anything "bad." So often I don't know the tolerances and protocols here till they're pointed out--and in fact, they are unusual here and cannot be guessed at, sometimes. I don't mind being called on stuff because it's your board and your rules. But I always intend to be an honest and forthright poster here. It is always better to operate with that assumption about all posters, right?

I base my judgment on experience. Sorry things are unusual here, thanks for pointing that out, another choice word. We are admittedly different here. The rules are pretty clear though and we don't discuss/debate them in a thread, understand? I'm sorry that someone questioned your honesty in an open thread, it will be addressed. This thread is locked.

 

[-X-]

Never in my life of posting have I ever seen the word "project" as bashing. I think of it as a neutral assessment people can agree with, disagree with, discuss, debate.

This is the root of the discussion I guess. Some people do take the word "project" as an indictment. We had a rather lively discussion about Quinn when he was drafted, and the word "project" seemed to be the focus of the entire discussion. It depends on what you mean by it I suppose. Sometimes project can refer to a Eric Crouch (forcing a guy into a position where he'll likely never succeed) or it can refer to a Robert Quinn (someone who had time off and would take a little more time to develop into a NFL caliber DE).

After reading the entire thread (twice), I don't see anything that should offend the senses. Bradford by far exceeded expectations during his first season because the offense was tailored to his strengths. Shurmur, love him or hate him, did a fairly good job of keeping him within a scheme that made his transition easier. The mess of a season that followed can be attributed to a great many things. Truncated off-season, new offense, new OC, injuries, and yes ... Bradford himself. I don't think that we should try to assign percentages of blame either. That's another cause of strife. One thing I'm sure we're all very much aware of, is that no QB could have done much better given the circumstances.

Is Sam a project? I can't answer that because my meaning of "project" would differ from someone else's. All I know is this. If Sam can get adequate protection and have more than one receiver at his disposal, he will likely do very well. We've seen what he could do when he had Clayton at full health in 2010 and the two were clicking. Add Fells and Amendola into the mix (two outlet receivers), and he didn't look much like a project to me. Sure he had/has things to work on, but it was no illusion when he had control of the offense and everyone was pretty much healthy. And that was without an illustrious supporting cast.

Let's do this. Read each other. Refrain from dismissive statements toward each other. Don't accuse people of lying, and don't try to assign or read motives. Don't take pot shots at each other. Understand that everyone sees things differently. Understand that everyone is a Rams fan here, and that nobody wants anyone to fail. For instance, if I think that Jason Smith could be looking at the end of his stint here, that doesn't mean that I want him to be cut. I'd much rather he turn his career around and become an all-pro O-lineman (guard, RT, whatever). And if I say that he may never get over the hump that secures his future with the Rams, that doesn't mean I dislike the guy. It just means that what I see is what I see. And of course, I hope to be wrong.

Regarding the somewhat confusing nature of this board, I can try to sum it up. Bradford may have to work on pre-snaps. He may have to work on his deep touch. He may have to improve his pocket presence. But one thing is for certain. He's smart, studious, dedicated, has a good arm, has mobility, and he's the future of this Franchise. As such, he's going to be a great one. Not, "he may or may not turn out to be good." Simply, "He's going to be a great one." Get it?

Homerism, optimism, board unity, blind faith. The 4 pillars of ROD.