The "IT" factor..

I pretty much listen to ESPN on the radio all day, and enjoy Cowherd, (although he's getting pretty full of himself), having followed him since he was here in Vegas 15 years ago.

Anyway, he has Trent Dilfer on weekly, (who I like as well), but got a little sick of listening to their talking about Sanchez last year. (Before I go any further, trust me, I get it - New York and St. Louis are worlds apart market and profile wise).

The guy had hardly played in college, so their main arguement was that he had "IT".

Guess who else does. While watching the preseason games with my wife (not a fan), I told her I wished see could realize what she was watching.

I have nothing but admiration for Bulger, but he doesn't have what Bradford does. I literally could not believe what I was seeing.

Poise. No panic. No ducking. Moving in the pocket. Rolling out. Reading blitzes. Checking down. FIRING the ball. Cool. Calm. Composed. Not too high. Not too low. Decisive. Killer instinct.

And I don't care who he was playing with or against, it was patently obvious that he has it, (whatever "IT" is). Without Jackson, I might add.

At 62, I've watched a few football games, and if this guy stays healthy, look flippin' out.

Rookie this, Rookie that, and Rookie the other thing, and blah, blah, blah. On a scale of 1-10, this guy just took us from a 2 to a 4 or 5, and it's going to feed on itself.

I don't know if the Rams win Sunday, but I'll bet no one hears any sosar remarks. Enjoy the ride.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VegasRam

I pretty much listen to ESPN on the radio all day, and enjoy Cowherd, (although he's getting pretty full of himself), having followed him since he was here in Vegas 15 years ago.

Anyway, he has Trent Dilfer on weekly, (who I like as well), but got a little sick of listening to their talking about Sanchez last year. (Before I go any further, trust me, I get it - New York and St. Louis are worlds apart market and profile wise).

The guy had hardly played in college, so their main arguement was that he had "IT".

Guess who else does. While watching the preseason games with my wife (not a fan), I told her I wished see could realize what she was watching.

I have nothing but admiration for Bulger, but he doesn't have what Bradford does. I literally could not believe what I was seeing.

Poise. No panic. No ducking. Moving in the pocket. Rolling out. Reading blitzes. Checking down. FIRING the ball. Cool. Calm. Composed. Not too high. Not too low. Decisive. Killer instinct.

And I don't care who he was playing with or against, it was patently obvious that he has it, (whatever "IT" is). Without Jackson, I might add.

At 62, I've watched a few football games, and if this guy stays healthy, look flippin' out.

Rookie this, Rookie that, and Rookie the other thing, and blah, blah, blah. On a scale of 1-10, this guy just took us from a 2 to a 4 or 5, and it's going to feed on itself.

I don't know if the Rams win Sunday, but I'll bet no one hears any sosar remarks. Enjoy the ride.

---

Dude I'm all in with you! I haven't been this excited since 08 when we beat the skins and boys

I love it when you talk dirty!!!

All pals are saying "Rookie this and that" and "It was the preseason."

How about we just give it the eyeball test? Who was the best player on the field in the last two preseason games? SAM BRADFORD, and it's not even close.

People who don't understand football can watch the game and understand that the guy wearing #8 seems like he's pretty good.

He gets an A+ on the eyeball test.

I see no reason why he can't statistically outdo Matt Ryan, Flacco, or Big Ben in his rookie year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPskywalker

I love it when you talk dirty!!!

All pals are saying "Rookie this and that" and "It was the preseason."

How about we just give it the eyeball test? Who was the best player on the field in the last two preseason games? SAM BRADFORD, and it's not even close.

People who don't understand football can watch the game and understand that the guy wearing #8 seems like he's pretty good.

He gets an A+ on the eyeball test.

I see no reason why he can't statistically outdo Matt Ryan, Flacco, or Big Ben in his rookie year.

---

IMO Bradford's success depends on the health of SJ. It will be too easy to shut down a rookie in a one-dimensional offense. I could be wrong and Bradford could pull a Marino on us, but I will be happy with just a steady progression.

Sanchez was below average, at best, last year. His team went to playoffs and the conference finals in spite of him, not because of him. I am fairly certain you could have slotted any number of QBs into the Jets last year and they would have done roughly the same.

I am very underwhelmed by Sanchez's ability and decision making. If the Jets had let him throw more, he could have set the record for rookie INTs. He played in 15 games and only had 377 attempts for less than 2500 yards, and 20 INTs. A passer rating of 63. Not team is being "lead" or winning because of a QB who throws for less than 2500 yards with 20 INTs. If their defense stunk, or was even average, we wouldn't have any conversations about Sanchez leading the Jets and being incredible. We'd be talking about whether Sanchez came out too early and if he will ever be good because he didn't play very well at all.

I just don't get the media fascination with Sanchez. He doesn't have "it", he has a media darling personality and face. Until Sanchez performs better than a battered Marc Bulger on a terrible team with no WRs and a banged up RB, he won't be a star or even an average QB in my mind.

Bulger, btw, had a passer rating of 70.7, on the worst team in the league. Sanchez managed 63 on a playoff team. I'm so not sold.

Bradford, however, I agree, has "it". At least from what I've seen. He threw the ball with confidence, poise, and intelligence in the pre-season. In addition, of course, to incredible accuracy and better power than I expected. Let's hope he keeps doing it!

P.S. Sorry for the Sanchez rant, it just bugs me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by berg8309

Sanchez was below average, at best, last year. His team went to playoffs and the conference finals in spite of him, not because of him. I am fairly certain you could have slotted any number of QBs into the Jets last year and they would have done roughly the same.

I am very underwhelmed by Sanchez's ability and decision making. If the Jets had let him throw more, he could have set the record for rookie INTs. He played in 15 games and only had 377 attempts for less than 2500 yards, and 20 INTs. A passer rating of 63. Not team is being "lead" or winning because of a QB who throws for less than 2500 yards with 20 INTs. If their defense stunk, or was even average, we wouldn't have any conversations about Sanchez leading the Jets and being incredible. We'd be talking about whether Sanchez came out too early and if he will ever be good because he didn't play very well at all.

I just don't get the media fascination with Sanchez. He doesn't have "it", he has a media darling personality and face. Until Sanchez performs better than a battered Marc Bulger on a terrible team with no WRs and a banged up RB, he won't be a star or even an average QB in my mind.

Bulger, btw, had a passer rating of 70.7, on the worst team in the league. Sanchez managed 63 on a playoff team. I'm so not sold.

Bradford, however, I agree, has "it". At least from what I've seen. He threw the ball with confidence, poise, and intelligence in the pre-season. In addition, of course, to incredible accuracy and better power than I expected. Let's hope he keeps doing it!

P.S. Sorry for the Sanchez rant, it just bugs me

---

Berg - do not apologise. You made the point I should have.

Also - not a WORD from either Cowherd or Dilfer on Bradford, and their praise last year for Marky Mark was all in PRESEASON.

And I'm VERY interested in seeing the stats - Bradford v Sanchez - given the disparity between the talent on their respective teams.

P.S. Trust me, he will.;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by berg8309

Sanchez was below average, at best, last year. His team went to playoffs and the conference finals in spite of him, not because of him. I am fairly certain you could have slotted any number of QBs into the Jets last year and they would have done roughly the same.

I am very underwhelmed by Sanchez's ability and decision making. If the Jets had let him throw more, he could have set the record for rookie INTs. He played in 15 games and only had 377 attempts for less than 2500 yards, and 20 INTs. A passer rating of 63. Not team is being "lead" or winning because of a QB who throws for less than 2500 yards with 20 INTs. If their defense stunk, or was even average, we wouldn't have any conversations about Sanchez leading the Jets and being incredible. We'd be talking about whether Sanchez came out too early and if he will ever be good because he didn't play very well at all.

I just don't get the media fascination with Sanchez. He doesn't have "it", he has a media darling personality and face. Until Sanchez performs better than a battered Marc Bulger on a terrible team with no WRs and a banged up RB, he won't be a star or even an average QB in my mind.

Bulger, btw, had a passer rating of 70.7, on the worst team in the league. Sanchez managed 63 on a playoff team. I'm so not sold.

Bradford, however, I agree, has "it". At least from what I've seen. He threw the ball with confidence, poise, and intelligence in the pre-season. In addition, of course, to incredible accuracy and better power than I expected. Let's hope he keeps doing it!

P.S. Sorry for the Sanchez rant, it just bugs me

---

Wow, you took the words right out of my mouth! It bugs me too. Sanchez is WAY overrated and does not have "it". He is the weak link on the Jets, despite having incredible talent around him.

I know what "it" is and you're right, Bradford has "IT". If we can keep him upright, it's going to be some kind of fun watching the Rams offense this year.

I hate to say it, but Sanchez lit it up in the preseason last year. He looked like Joe Namath.

Trent picked sam to be a bust in the NFL. So he's not going to talk about sam because he's doing good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guitardeth

Trent picked sam to be a bust in the NFL. So he's not going to talk about sam because he's doing good.

---

Yep he would know what a bust looks like with his hall of fame career. :|


Anyways, I can't wait to see what happens with sj39 and sammy b get on the field for a game not just a drive.

For those saying its up to jackson, quick question. Why is it up to jackson when he has done good without jackson? Believe me I am one huge supporter of sj39 and his abilities and what he brings to the table every week. But I think bradford has the ability to win without him. I think Jackson will make him better but I don't think he is necessary to the rams winning or at least not the only means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPskywalker

I hate to say it, but Sanchez lit it up in the preseason last year. He looked like Joe Namath.

---

Maybe he lit up the pre-season least year, but he played like a 3rd stringer when the games started counting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by berg8309

Maybe he lit up the pre-season least year, but he played like a 3rd stringer when the games started counting.

---

So let's hope that Bradford doesn't follow Sanchez...;)


Bradford has IT. IT is obvious. And on Sunday, he will use IT to beat the Cardinals.

Sanchez was a rookie last year. He was overhyped because he came from USC and plays in New York. He certainly had his struggles. But labeling him as 'terrible" is incredibly shortsighted. If Bradford has the same type of year statistically that Sanchez had last year (very possible given our lack of weapons offensively), I hardly think the fans on this board will say 'the guy is overrated".

That said, Bradford certainly gives us hope. He appears to possess the physical tools and intangibles that make for a winning player. "Cautious optimism" is the term that comes to mind. I have to see him get it done during the regular season before I am sold.

When Dilfer has to eat his summary diss of Sam Bradford, it will be a happy day for me. I usually respect what he has to say, but this just reminded me of the do-nothing QB backing into a Super Bowl he was....

Regardless of who is in the backfield, Bradford is going to take what the D gives him. This is a smart QB....remember his Wonderlic score?

I think part of Bradford's success will come from the play calling. If he's getting a lot of the same plays called down that he had in the Cleveland game, then he's pretty much doomed. They need to trust their countless hours of tape evaluation on the guy, and realize they brought him in to be that type of quarterback, not a Trent Dilfer, hand-the-ball-off-40-times-and-make-some-short-screen-passes, type of quarterback.

I think the play calling and game plan will be just as important as who he's throwing to this year.