When has Sam ever beat a top tier Defense?

[SJ76]

I'm sick of hearing... "Oh Bradford woulda beat Seattle. Bradford woulda beat Tennesee."

Well he sure as he'll looked like a freshman against San Fran with his deer in headlights look, tripping over his own feet.

What makes you so sure Bradford would have even shown up against Seattle? Please. They guy was awful at home versus the 49ers and when has he ever done anything against a good D?

Last year it was Greg z with 4 FGs and our D playing awesome to beat Seattle. Janoris and Greg Z beat the niners last year too.

Spare me with Sam is better so we would have won. Sure he's a little better. But he doesn't go big against the good defenses. He climbs in his shell.

San Fran at home. Lolol

 

[SJ76]

I'll even throw in garbage time. I know that his favorite time.

 

[ksudodger]

Um, didn't Bradford beat Seattle last year? Just sayin.
Um. didn't Bradford beat San Fran TWICE (yes we won the tied game)? Just sayin

 

[SJ76]

Last year versus Seattle: Greg Z had 4 FGs, including a 58 yarder and a 60 yarder. Johnny Hecker had 1 TD on a fake FG defense had Russell Wilson running for his life. Sooooo ummm mmmmm???

Last year versus San Fran W: janoris jenkins returned TD, Greg Z kicks a 53 yarder to tie and a 54 yarder to win in OT. Sooooo ummmmm??? And I forgot about a safety by the D.


Try again

 

[SJ76]

[ame]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8Cs5O0PEnYs[/ame]




It's a simple question!

 

[SJ76]

And Houston has a good D, but it helps when we get a quick score after a pick to the Houston 2 yard line and 4 turnovers total from our D. 2 of which set up quick, short passes for TDs for Sam. He had 3 TDs -all under 5 yards. Wow! ST score in that route as well. That was not a top tier D, I don't care what your stats say. Sam didn't even have 200 yards in that game so it wasn't like he tore it up.

That was a good team effort and a meltdown by the Houston offense.

 

[Smed55]

And Houston has a good D, but it helps when we get a quick score after a pick to the Houston 2 yard line and 4 turnovers total from our D. 2 of which set up quick, short passes for TDs for Sam. He had 3 TDs -all under 5 yards. Wow! ST score in that route as well. That was not a top tier D, I don't care what your stats say. Sam didn't even have 200 yards in that game so it wasn't like he tore it up.

That was a good team effort and a meltdown by the Houston offense.

Ditto that, I keep saying the same thing!

 

[Chilipepper]

This Last game against the Colts I was thinking that if Bradford was the starter Rams would of lost. Bradford would of never found Austin for those two TD's. Bradford himself would of gave up a couple of TD's with a INT, a fumble. Pass probably would of got batted down as Austin did his crossing pattern. Bradford is not a winner. Makes too many errors and stinks in the red zone to ever lead the RAMS to anything. Hope he's done as a RAM.

 

[demiurge]

OK, so winning isn't enough for you. It has to be winning because of him. Its not enough that we went 4-1-1 against a very tough NFC West last year, Bradford had to put up big numbers in those wins.

Well, guess what. This has been a very bad team during the last decade. They lost more games than any other franchise over a 10 year period. HISTORICALLY bad.

Bradford during that time has actually had the team on the upswing - he won rookie of the year, got hurt the next year, did very well the year after that, and was having his best season - far better than Clemens or anyone else on the roster - when he got hurt again.

Fisher stated one of the reasons he came to the Rams was because the already had their franchise QB in place. I put stock in his opinion.

Fisher's offenses are normally somewhat conservative, ball control offenses. We didn't have our best RB and our line hadn't jelled in the first few games of the season - through preseason and the first 4 games we averaged less than 50 yards a game rushing and 3 yards a carry. REALLY bad.

I'm glad we've got that going now and Kellen Clemens is taking advantage of it.

But Clemens isn't the QB Bradford is. Half his yards in the blowout against Indy came from 1 play - a 4 yard crossing route that Austin turned into a 81 yard pass.

Clemens lost us that game against Seattle. QB rating of 36, QBR of 16.5, 48% of his passes, 5.1 average per attempt. That isn't bad. That's atrocious. You telling me Sam wouldn't have done better, with the young weapons this year, than he did last year?

Now, is Sam worth the $17 million cap hit he'll cost next year? No, he isn't. That doesn't mean he's a bad player. Just that because of the vagaries of the salary cap he's getting paid like an elite QB. And he's not one. The franchise might be better off moving on in the next year or two.

But I'm pretty confident he wins that Seattle game, because we would have put up more than 3 FGs, and we didn't need much more than that.

 

[BOSS429Mustang]

I believe the majority of the posters here are in agreement that Bradford is better than Clemens. Even SJ admitted that. The question is: Is he good enough to lead the Rams going forward. That is where the real debate is. My personal opinion is no, and I won't get into reasons that are redundant at this point. If the Rams played 100 games with either Bradford or Clemens at QB with their current team, I think they win maybe let's say 35 of them with Clemens. With Bradford they win maybe 40. So the upgrade isn't significant. And in proportion to the salary difference----then it becomes a no brainer---Clemens is the clear choice dollar for dollar. You got it right Demiurge; Bradford is worth no where near the $$$ he's getting. As I've said in earlier posts, I believe the lustre has worn off Bradford around the league, and I don't believe he'll be able to get another big contract at this point. If he expects to, and holds out for something like that, he's only going to increase the vitriol that some fans feel for him already. And if the Rams are stupid enough to give it to him, well then they deserve exactly what they get. After all, they do have a history of making some just horrible decisions. They've made an art of it over the last 12-13 years. Like I always say to my daughter--"You're going to learn, one way or another. It's your choice whether you learn the easy way or the hard way" We need to trade Bradford and get a 2nd round pick for him (if we're lucky and there is some sucker out there) and move on. Clemens is not the long term answer either. If he was he wouldn't be bouncing around the league for so long. We can succeed with a rookie QB. That is the NFL right now. Guys are coming in and playing well right out of college. The sky won't fall for all you Bradford "enthusiasts" if we trade him or even release him depending on his salary demands.

 

[demiurge]

I believe the majority of the posters here are in agreement that Bradford is better than Clemens. Even SJ admitted that. The question is: Is he good enough to lead the Rams going forward. That is where the real debate is. My personal opinion is no, and I won't get into reasons that are redundant at this point. If the Rams played 100 games with either Bradford or Clemens at QB with their current team, I think they win maybe let's say 35 of them with Clemens. With Bradford they win maybe 40. So the upgrade isn't significant. And in proportion to the salary difference----then it becomes a no brainer---Clemens is the clear choice dollar for dollar. You got it right Demiurge; Bradford is worth no where near the $$$ he's getting. As I've said in earlier posts, I believe the lustre has worn off Bradford around the league, and I don't believe he'll be able to get another big contract at this point. If he expects to, and holds out for something like that, he's only going to increase the vitriol that some fans feel for him already. And if the Rams are stupid enough to give it to him, well then they deserve exactly what they get. After all, they do have a history of making some just horrible decisions. They've made an art of it over the last 12-13 years. Like I always say to my daughter--"You're going to learn, one way or another. It's your choice whether you learn the easy way or the hard way" We need to trade Bradford and get a 2nd round pick for him (if we're lucky and there is some sucker out there) and move on. Clemens is not the long term answer either. If he was he wouldn't be bouncing around the league for so long. We can succeed with a rookie QB. That is the NFL right now. Guys are coming in and playing well right out of college. The sky won't fall for all you Bradford "enthusiasts" if we trade him or even release him depending on his salary demands.

I agree with most of that, though I disagree with the amounts of game won. Clemens at 35 is about right - with all the young talent on this team maturing, I think Sam would be about 55, maybe 60. The problem is $17 million you'd need to make it 70-75, and he's not that guy. So I'm hoping he takes a pay cut to stay - I think he can win games here in the long run, be a guy that leads the team to some playoff success. Going for another rookie would be yet another gamble, QBs bust about 50% of the time, and set us back another 2-3 years before we could expect to be truly competitive. Again.

If he demands that level of money for future contract negotiations though, he'll have to go. I'm not sure where he'll come down on that. He won't get that kind of money anywhere else, that's for sure. He should be a $10 million guy.

 

[Smed55]

I agree with most of that, though I disagree with the amounts of game won. Clemens at 35 is about right - with all the young talent on this team maturing, I think Sam would be about 55, maybe 60. The problem is $17 million you'd need to make it 70-75, and he's not that guy. So I'm hoping he takes a pay cut to stay - I think he can win games here in the long run, be a guy that leads the team to some playoff success. Going for another rookie would be yet another gamble, QBs bust about 50% of the time, and set us back another 2-3 years before we could expect to be truly competitive. Again.

If he demands that level of money for future contract negotiations though, he'll have to go. I'm not sure where he'll come down on that. He won't get that kind of money anywhere else, that's for sure. He should be a $10 million guy.

And I agree with most of what you both say, except that if you believe Bradford would win 55-60 games out of 100, that will not lead us to any playoff success. Plus he hasn't won 50% of his games in 3 1/2 years, so even getting to 55%-60% from a #1 franchise type QB isn't going to cut it?

 

[Retroram52]

Well, Maybe John Elway (who is the Broncos GM) can be enticed to cough up a 2nd for Bradford because P. Manny is having back problems to the point of an MRI and ain't going to last forever. Besides, we still have Austin Davis and Brady Quinn on our roster.

 

[DK7000]

Someone has an unhealthy obsession with Sam Bradford...

 

[Ramtim]

Bradford may be gone! I would draft a QB and start Clemens next season if he continues to grow and get more comfortable with the offense and players. Heck who was it a Ram receiver on a radio show threw Bradford under the bus already by putting him down and giving Clemens the atta boy!

 

[Clayton]

Someone has an unhealthy obsession with Sam Bradford...

Someone making that much money shouldn't be living rent free in his head

 

[demiurge]

And I agree with most of what you both say, except that if you believe Bradford would win 55-60 games out of 100, that will not lead us to any playoff success. Plus he hasn't won 50% of his games in 3 1/2 years, so even getting to 55%-60% from a #1 franchise type QB isn't going to cut it?

Eh, its only the absolutely top tier guys that win consistently every year - in this current generation its really on Brady and Manning. If you win 40% of your games 1 year and go 6-10, and win 80% the next and go 12-4, you are still only winning 60% of your games. I'd love Sam to be that 80% all the time guy like Brady or Manning, but those are 1st ballot hall of famers and that's a pretty high bar to ask for.

If you are a .550-600 guy, you could be Drew Brees or Eli Manning. I'd take that.

Of course you could be Tony Romo or Philip Rivers too. Good, but not quite good enough.

If you are a .650 or higher, odds are you are going to make the hall of fame. Current crop includes Brady, Manning, Roethlesberger, Flacco, and Rogers. Only guy that definitely wouldn't be there is Ryan. Flacco probably doesn't deserve it yet, but has a long time still to make his case.

But then, he's young, and could go up or down depending on the fortunes of his team. And it sure seems like Big Ben's winning % is going to start taking a dive if he continues to stay at the Steelers.

Bradford's definitely got enough talent to win. But he needs talent around him. That's no great indictment - every QB does. I think the coaching staff will give him one more year before they make a decision.

 

[Smed55]

Eh, its only the absolutely top tier guys that win consistently every year - in this current generation its really on Brady and Manning. If you win 40% of your games 1 year and go 6-10, and win 80% the next and go 12-4, you are still only winning 60% of your games. I'd love Sam to be that 80% all the time guy like Brady or Manning, but those are 1st ballot hall of famers and that's a pretty high bar to ask for.

If you are a .550-600 guy, you could be Drew Brees or Eli Manning. I'd take that.

Of course you could be Tony Romo or Philip Rivers too. Good, but not quite good enough.

If you are a .650 or higher, odds are you are going to make the hall of fame. Current crop includes Brady, Manning, Roethlesberger, Flacco, and Rogers. Only guy that definitely wouldn't be there is Ryan. Flacco probably doesn't deserve it yet, but has a long time still to make his case.

But then, he's young, and could go up or down depending on the fortunes of his team. And it sure seems
like Big Ben's winning % is going to start taking a dive if he continues to stay at the Steelers.

Bradford's definitely got enough talent to win. But he needs talent around him. That's no great indictment - every QB does. I think the coaching staff will give him one more year before they make a decision.

Yes I agree, there would be a few good years in there, but you are not going to make that 6 win season to 12 win season to often, that's why I would just take an average of 8-9 wins a year. In 6 years you would play 100 games, you would have that one good year possibly two, but overall you would be an 8-9 win team. You could get to the playoffs, but odds are you wouldn't be going very far, except that 1 good year, but obviously I would take making the playoffs as a 8-9 team every year, it sure beats the he'll out of what we have had to put up with over the past 10+ years.

Yes there are only a handful of teams that are going to have a stud QB at any one time, do I like Bradford, no do I think he can be good, yes, he just needs to do it!

 

[Vitamike]

This whole argument is rather stale and tired at best. We should all move on as most of us are in one camp or another since Sammy is not going to play another down this year.

And YES, I'M BACK!!!

 

[Retroram52]

Vita. Dude, you were gone for awhile. Check out the sign-up thread for the game on December 10th here in Phoenix. I know you and I and blue talked about it and now the game is almost here.