I'm tired of hearing the "I'm tired of hearing the excuses" excuses.

[macrammer]

Maybe you're right. Maybe everyone is willing to evaluate Bradford with context in place. A small sample that would say otherwise. No "if", of course. And whether it is a minority or majority of posters is irrelevant. The mindset that disregards all context but passes judgment nonetheless is not worthwhile, regardless of number.

A small sample indeed. This sample is not indicative of your comment earlier "posted once, posted a thousand times comment" on your OP. From your sample above, seems to me all statements are true. He has played inconsistent. He has had horrible production as our QB he has not responded with game on the line and made the throws required to turn a L into a W. I agree the comment "he is a bust until" is silly at best........

I see two samples above where someone did state "no excuses."

Is it you are peeved about questioning Bradford play this year?

This looks to be one of those posts that dictate your thoughts only and disregard opinions and facts of others that differ.

In all fairness, that is more disturbing to me then the few no excuse threads out there.

[HUbison]

This sample is not indicative of your comment earlier "posted once, posted a thousand times comment" on your OP.

As I said the number itself is irrelevant. It's the mindset, not the number of participants which I'm addressing. And I'm sure nothing more needs to be said as I will assume you are familiar with the concept of a figure of speech.

This looks to be one of those posts that dictate your thoughts only and disregard opinions and facts of others that differ.

Don't look now, macrammer, but to some degree or other that's every post on every forum. Nobody posts an opinion because they think they're wrong.

In all fairness, that is more disturbing to me then the few no excuse threads out there.

So summary judgment of the Rams franchise QB without utilizing context is less disturbing to you than my opinion? While I appreciate the value you give me, I think you might have missed my point.

[mh-i]

What a lot of fans don't seem to grasp is the relevancy of draft slot is gone as soon as they sign their contract. The scoreboard neither gives points nor take them away based on where any player is drafted.

You don't think that more should be expected from a first round first over-all pick than a low pick? It certainly determines how much money they get payed and so in my mind increases the expectations. It is a game but it's also a business.

I will agree that's it's early to write Bradford off but it's not too early to lower expectations. I don't think he is or will be an elite QB in this league like the quaterbacks you listed. In Rams lingo he's probably a Chris Chandler type. I think it's likely to take Bradford 4 or 5 years to become an effective NFL QB.

So while fans shouldn't be too crazy judging him in his 2nd year, at the same time the fans that welcome excuses to explain the current situation shouldn't make Bradford out to be the second coming of Kurt Warner. He isn't.

[jkramsfan]

Probably locking onto the receiver is due to him not trusting his other receivers. They tend to drop balls ya know.. Holding on to the ball probably due to him waiting for his receiver to get open which most of our receivers have a hard time doing..

is it me or is dropping balls a big problem in the NFL this season, I know the rams receivers have dropped alot but so are other receivers,I am watching the Falcons/Texans game and just watched roddy white and julio jones drop back to back perfectly thrown balls to them,sorry alittle off topic but maybe it's time to take off those damn gloves and catch the ball.

[HUbison]

You don't think that more should be expected from a first round first over-all pick than a low pick?

Of course there are. As is true of every pick that is higher than another. However, expectations (much like the draft itself) are nothing more than speculation (some educated, some otherwise) on the professional career of each player.

It certainly determines how much money they get payed

Which lends itself to my point.....it only determines how much money they get paid on their FIRST contract.

It is a game but it's also a business.

Yes, it is. And that's why they don't base their SECOND contract on draft slot.

I will agree that's it's early to write Bradford off

Then we are ultimately in agreement.

I don't think he is or will be an elite QB in this league like the quaterbacks you listed.

He certainly isn't; but it's hard to properly say he will never.

In Rams lingo he's probably a Chris Chandler type.

Geez. I thought you said you hadn't given up on him.

[Rambos]

In Rams lingo he's probably a Chris Chandler type.

So after one and half years in the NFL, the first very successful and the second, one you want to forget. Bradford has all this upside and now you only see him as a "Chris Chandler type". Based on what?

Geez. I thought you said you hadn't given up on him.

Given up on him sounds like you have already passed judgement on him.

Lets look back just two years...

New York Times[/B], January 9: One N.F.L. scout, who was granted anonymity because he is not permitted to talk publicly about draft prospects, said Bradford was a "no-brainer" overall No. 1 pick and compared him to Troy Aikman, the first pick in the 1989 draft.

"When you've watched him at Oklahoma over the years, he sticks out like a sore thumb," said the scout. "He's not a nickel-dime, dink-and-dunk guy. He throws those deep balls as good as anyone I've ever seen."
...
"He's got the size, the arm, the feet and the release," said the scout. "He makes good decisions. He seems like a really easy guy to evaluate."

Bradford impresses scouts in passing workout

The result: rave reviews. Seattle Coach Pete Carroll, who was at Oklahoma for the workout, tweeted that Bradford “lit it up.”

Cowboys personnel executive who now analyzes the draft for NFL.com, said it was the best quarterback workout he had seen since Troy Aikman worked out for the Cowboys before they drafted him – in 1989. It almost left him speechless

St. Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford won The Associated Press 2010 NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year award on Friday.

He earned 44 votes from a nationwide panel of 50 media members who regularly cover the league. Only two other rookies received votes: Tampa Bay wide receiver Mike Williams earned four, and Pittsburgh center Maurkice Pouncey had two.

The one big question mark Bradford had coming that was a real concern, Bradford has answered the bell and that is can he hold up under the pounding,and he has.

[mh-i]

Geez. I thought you said you hadn't given up on him.

What I meant by that was that Chandler had his better years LATER in his career. Inbetween his two stints with the Rams. It could be Bradford is on the same path.

[mh-i]

Which lends itself to my point.....it only determines how much money they get paid on their FIRST contract. Yes, it is. And that's why they don't base their SECOND contract on draft slot.

Um...............let's not downplay the $78 million deal, $50 million guaranteed that Bradford got. That's SIGNIFICANTLY more money than playersd selected even lower in the 1st round let alone the later rounds. Bradford will be lucky to get that kind of money on his second contract. It's may be unreasonable in your mind for fans to expect a certain amount of return on a 50-78 million contract but it's not at all unreasonable for ownership to have certain expectations.

[Nick]

I do not believe Sam Bradford is playing good football. I think part of that is because those around him are not playing good football either. But I also believe that he himself is not playing good football as well. I've formed that opinion by watching him play, where I've seen him both suffer from the mistakes of those around him but also miss opportunities to make plays for his team.

When Sam is well protected, has open receivers, and misses the throw, or when he turns the ball over because he telegraphed his throw, then yeah, he has "no excuses" for those mistakes. The idea that other great or even Hall of Fame caliber quarterbacks couldn't do any better than Sam falls flat there to me, because they would likely be able to take advantage of those opportunities. The players around Sam are not failing him on every single play of every single game, so he needs to make plays when they're there to be made. When he doesn't, he's as deserving of criticism as anyone else. I would hope most would agree with that.

I think we spend too much time worrying about, responding to, and thus legitimizing the fringes of the fan base. Which, to me, are the "Bradford is blameless" or "Bradford is a bust" opinions. They exist, but as someone else said, I think they represent a small minority of the actual opinions out there, and thus really aren't deserving of the amount of attention they receive. I'm as guilty when it comes to that as anyone. Perhaps we should treat them more like the creepy uncle at Christmas and just ignore them.

Sam Bradford is an exceptionally talented quarterback, but right now IMO, he's playing bad football on a bad team. While I believe it's too early to give up on Sam, I am concerned about the bad habits and tendencies I see on Sunday. He, like every other player on this team, needs to play better if the Rams are going to get better in the long-term, just like the Rams need to do a better job surrounding him with the kind of talent that will help make his job easier.

[macrammer]

As I said the number itself is irrelevant. It's the mindset, not the number of participants which I'm addressing. And I'm sure nothing more needs to be said as I will assume you are familiar with the concept of a figure of speech.Don't look now, macrammer, but to some degree or other that's every post on every forum. Nobody posts an opinion because they think they're wrong. So summary judgment of the Rams franchise QB without utilizing context is less disturbing to you than my opinion? While I appreciate the value you give me, I think you might have missed my point.

I am not one to express my opinions with hyberbole. When someone says 1000 times they should be factual. I simply lose faith in that person's ability to represent themselves in a factual manner and take their thought with grain of salt. If the number did not mean anything, why state 1000 times? Was it to gain traction? and yes, surprisingly I do understand concept of figure of speech.

[Rambos]

but right now IMO, he's playing bad football on a bad team.

Right now he's on a bad team playing bad football .

Perhaps we should treat them more like the creepy uncle at Christmas and just ignore them.

LMAO

[punahou]

Manning (w/ a healthy neck), Rodgers...........none of them would have made this team win games. And I'm sure some would have been "tired of hearing the excuses" then as well.

While agree with much that is posted here, players like Manning are now proving--- proving that a team can be horrible without 1 player; as long as that 1 player has the ability to make wine out of water, or fish out of bread.
It is arguable that Indianapolis would be a 10+ win team if Manning were playing, but as it stands now they are a 1 win team.

The point I am trying to make is that whatever the situation may be, truly great players MAKE plays happen, rather than wait for them to happen.

I have no expectations of the Rams winning more games this year with Bradford, but I do expect more than 1 touchdown average per game (whatever it is- its close to that), and for Bradford to step up and lead the damned offense to do something other than eating popcorn watching their defense play the game. it's almsot as if he has adopted Spag's non chalant attitude.

[HUbison]

I am not one to express my opinions with hyberbole. When someone says 1000 times they should be factual. I simply lose faith in that person's ability to represent themselves in a factual manner and take their thought with grain of salt.

So then, you actually take a grain of salt.

[HUbison]

Perhaps we should treat them more like the creepy uncle at Christmas and just ignore them.

Which, of course Nick, is fine until the Uncle gets up and starts spouting off about the time he was abducted by aliens. And then it just makes the whole family look bad.

The idea that other great or even Hall of Fame caliber quarterbacks couldn't do any better than Sam falls flat there to me, because they would likely be able to take advantage of those opportunities.

Not that they would do no better individually, the most likely would play to some degree better individually. But rather that they would not be succeeding in the W-L column. This would still be a losing team with any of them.

Nick, surely you would agree with the basic premise that Bradford is not properly evaluated w/o the context of everything around him.

[Nick]

Which, of course Nick, is fine until the Uncle gets up and starts spouting off about the time he was abducted by aliens. And then it just makes the whole family look bad.

Which is when we ask someone to pass the next gift and continue with other discussion, so that we don't legitimize the fringe opinions of the family by letting him take over our holiday.

Not that they would do no better individually, the most likely would play to some degree better individually. But rather that they would not be succeeding in the W-L column. This would still be a losing team with any of them.

It's an impossible-to-prove hypothetical scenario. We have no idea what could or would have happened.

Nick, surely you would agree with the basic premise that Bradford is not properly evaluated w/o the context of everything around him.

You can only evaluate a quarterback - heck, any player - in the context of the situation he plays in. As I said earlier, within that context, I do not think Bradford has played well this year. While I think the "bust" talk is premature, I do believe he's developed some habits this year (and some would argue at the end of last year) that he's going to have to break if he wants to reach his potential.