My POV of Sam Bradford

I posted this in another thread but I felt this warranted its own thread and discussion. As most of you should know by now, I was a huge supporter of drafting Bradford. I love the kid. I still do. However, I don't wear the dollar-store rose-colored shades that a portion of this board wears religiously.



So okay here...I'm going to compare this situation to what I have to deal with at work.

Let's say you are an investor managing a portfolio of stocks for your investment firm or hedge fund.

Most of your stocks are performing fairly well and you are pleased because you've done due diligence in your research.


However..........
There is this one stock that you bought many shares of for a massive amount of money because it is supposedly a "blue-chip" prospect. The return on your investment was forecasted to be HUGE and would come in a few years.

So you wait. And wait. Months go by and this stock shows some volatility, jumping up several points and then falling right back down. You think the price will rally ANY MOMENT because you've done so much research on it and it's supposed to be a BLUE-CHIP stock! Right?

After a few years, you start to realize that the old saying is true. No investment is 100% correct. No matter how much you adore that stock, no matter how much time you spent researching it and convincing yourself that you will profit from it, it just won't turn out the way you expected and sometimes that's just how the dice rolls.

So what do you now? Do you sell the stock? Do you keep it and hope it improves even though it's a huge crutch because it contains a big portion of your money? Or do you research another "blue-chip" stock and buy that in hopes of making up for the loss of this stock?

As a prominent investor, it's a hard decision to let go of a stock that's doing bad because that results in an automatic loss of profit. But then again, holding it will do you no good as it will just sit there losing money each year for you.


So what's the point of this story? The point is, not every investment will turn out the way you expect it to. Even if you are CERTAIN a blue-chip stock will for sure rise in price, nothing is absolute. Nothing can be accurately predicted. Sometimes you realize your situation and cut your losses and move on.


So RockinRam, is this "blue-chip" stock you are mentioning Sam Bradford?

Well...maybe. Or maybe not. Some people might think it is. Some might think Bradford is the stock in your portfolio who is still waiting to break out. However, one thing is certain. Even if Bradford is not this stock now, if he does not show the required improvement next year or even the year after that, he WILL be this stock.

Rockin,

Interesting take on the Bradford saga. I would tend to agree that he has to take the requisite steps forward (this weekend against a lousy Tampa Bay pass defense would be an optimal time) to stake his claim going forward to the title of the Franchise QB of the St. Louis Rams.

Oh, and with regards to your under performing stock, have you been looking at my portfolio or what?!:eek:

At any rate you might consider selling some options like a covered call for some income and/or buying a put for downside protection....Just a thought.:king:


WHAT SAY YE?

Bad analogy. Each stock in your portfolio succeeds or fails on the basis of its own individual merits. Sam's success or failure is dependent upon the rest of the team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Bad analogy. Each stock in your portfolio succeeds or fails on the basis of its own individual merits. Sam's success or failure is dependent upon the rest of the team.

---

end thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Bad analogy. Each stock in your portfolio succeeds or fails on the basis of its own individual merits. Sam's success or failure is dependent upon the rest of the team.

---

Lesson #1: Stocks are NOT purely influenced by their own individual merits. The market economy as a whole, catalysts, the mentality of buyers', other industries...they all affect a stock's performance.


How does this relate? If the market as a whole is performing well and the majority of your stocks are performing as expected except one...you connect the dots there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcpeepants232003

end thread

---

Thank goodness I had you here to decide whether or not a thread ends. I don't know what I would have done without you. Thanks bud.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAMarkable

Rockin,

Interesting take on the Bradford saga. I would tend to agree that he has to take the requisite steps forward (this weekend against a lousy Tampa Bay pass defense would be an optimal time) to stake his claim going forward to the title of the Franchise QB of the St. Louis Rams.

---

I think we can all agree on a consensual basis here. IMO, if he struggles here then red flags will once again pop up.

Quote:

---

Oh, and with regards to your under performing stock, have you been looking at my portfolio or what?!:eek:

---

Adjust for the fiscal cliff! That's all I have to say. ;)

Quote:

---

At any rate you might consider selling some options like a covered call for some income and/or buying a put for downside protection....Just a thought.:king:


WHAT SAY YE?

---

Ahah, good point. +1

Hmm..how would I relate that to football though...

OK lets look at the stocks that has dropped this year.

Phillip Rivers
Cam Newton
MIcheal Vick
Tony Romo
Josh Freeman
Matt Cassel
Colt McCoy
Matt Hasselbeck
Mark Sanchez
J. Flaco
A. Smith
T. Tebow
J. Cutler
M. Flynn
M. Kolb
R. Fitzpatrick
M. Stafford
C. Ponder
B. Gabbard


Seems to me putting stock on a QB is a losing proposition. Only a few teams perform at a high level and in this league the QB's get too much credit when things go well and also get to much blame when they do not.

All you have to do is look back at the Rams and how easily they gave up on Kurt Warner only to watch him return to HOF form with the Cardinals.

If I was in a buying mode for stocks, I would be looking for a SS and FS as well as a blue chip WR and a strong performing offensive lineman. Most likely buy on a LB as well. I would hold on our QB. I think it is far too early to sell. While the perfromance is inconsistent, I think the upside is tremendous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Each stock in your portfolio succeeds or fails on the basis of its own individual merits.

---

Uhh. No.


The analogy is pretty sound. Whether I agree or not, I don't know. I'm pretty bummed out about Bradford. I wish he were doing better. He isn't very impressive to me. But, at the same time I don't think there is a better option at this point. Not that my or any of our opinions matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Bad analogy. Each stock in your portfolio succeeds or fails on the basis of its own individual merits. Sam's success or failure is dependent upon the rest of the team.

---

Typical. And yet your "eating paper" thread was spot on.....

And Sams success is dependent on the rest of the team because he is not elite. Elite QB's make their team better, QB's like Sam need everything in the world to be good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RockinRam

However, I don't wear the dollar-store rose-colored shades that a portion of this board wears religiously.

---

I don't know of anyone on the board wearing rose-colored shades. Everyone is aware that Bradford has not set the league on fire... now some of us believe he still will but understand there are no guarantees.

However there are many on the board walking around with blinders on while carrying a heavy load of past failures. The heavy load causes their knees to jerk and the blinders seem to shade any shred of optimism from their eyes. I guess we seem overly optimistic at time with our efforts to talk them off of the ledge.

[QUOTE=Rambunctious;449174 I guess we seem overly optimistic at time with our efforts to talk them off of the ledge.[/QUOTE]

It's not often I find people, telling others to not give up on Bradford, optimistic. Because every time they do that, they rip on about 10 offensive Rams players (and sometimes 11 defensive players) to come to his rescue. It is the bad coaching, it is horrible receiver play, bad o-line, old running back. The defense let Peterson run wild, so it's not really Bradfords fault, even though he gave up the same amount of points as he scored in the first 3 quarters of the game.

It gets frustrating to see people in here making it 21 other Rams players fault every time he has a bad game - and then turn around a say: "I told you so", every time the Rams win. Don't mind you that win is build on a sound defensive performances (The Bills game).

It's not the past that is dragging people down. It is the present. We have been ranked bottom 6th on offense in all seasons with Bradford at the helm.
He is not bad. He is average. On a less then average Rams offense. But average wasn't what the doctor ordered. You can get average for far less then 12 million a year.

However as the OP said. You give him a season more to prove he can be more than average. Show us he can improve even more, has he have improved this year. You can't move on from him. Yet. But that doesn't mean you can't call him average, when he is playing average. Or call him out when he is playing poorly.

It's not the past that is dragging people down. It is the present. The Rams are playing bad offensive football right now. This season! It's the present that is dragging people down.

If you wanna talk about optimism and playoffs next year, we could start up a thread talking about how our defense is putting up a top 10 season (with some breakdowns along the way), build up of young and promising players - and are maybe only two safeties and a little seasoning away from being something special.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CRAZYHORNS

OK lets look at the stocks that has dropped this year.

Phillip Rivers
Cam Newton
MIcheal Vick
Tony Romo
Josh Freeman
Matt Cassel
Colt McCoy
Matt Hasselbeck
Mark Sanchez
J. Flaco
A. Smith
T. Tebow
J. Cutler
M. Flynn
M. Kolb
R. Fitzpatrick
M. Stafford
C. Ponder
B. Gabbard


Seems to me putting stock on a QB is a losing proposition. Only a few teams perform at a high level and in this league the QB's get too much credit when things go well and also get to much blame when they do not.

All you have to do is look back at the Rams and how easily they gave up on Kurt Warner only to watch him return to HOF form with the Cardinals.

---

The problem is, we have to put stock in the QB position no matter what. Looking through the list you provided, there are some names I can pick out who do very well in the short run, but in the long run they kind of even themselves out. However, an investor can still profit off a stock that is only good short term.

As for Warner, sometimes that's just how life works whether it be football players or stocks...

All I know is you can't just hold on to something or someone for the sake of him not being a better player on another team. The important thing to keep in mind is whether that player or stock is performing for YOU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rambunctious

I don't know of anyone on the board wearing rose-colored shades. Everyone is aware that Bradford has not set the league on fire... now some of us believe he still will but understand there are no guarantees.

However there are many on the board walking around with blinders on while carrying a heavy load of past failures. The heavy load causes their knees to jerk and the blinders seem to shade any shred of optimism from their eyes. I guess we seem overly optimistic at time with our efforts to talk them off of the ledge.

---

You claim there's no one wearing rose shades but there are people with their blinders on? Come on man. There are certainly a good amount of posters on each end of the spectrum on this forum.

I see people stating that everyone else is the problem besides Bradford as often as I see people laying the blame solely on him.


The problem is with some of these so-called "Bradford defenders" is that they claim that they realize that Bradford needs to improve, but when other posters state that Bradford needs to show more improvement, they start attacking. No need to turn this into a Supporter vs. Defender debate, I know what I read and I'm simply stating that here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macrammer

If I was in a buying mode for stocks, I would be looking for a SS and FS as well as a blue chip WR and a strong performing offensive lineman. Most likely buy on a LB as well. I would hold on our QB.

---

All good points.

I definitely would be doing some research on potential SS and FS stocks as well as a high-caliber WR stock.

Quote:

---

I think it is far too early to sell. While the perfromance is inconsistent, I think the upside is tremendous.

---

So you're more of a long-term guy eh? I like it. :D

I tend to agree on this one too. I certainly think it's too early to cut our losses, but I do not think it's too early to potentially put this stock on the "watch-list".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emuen

It's not often I find people, telling others to not give up on Bradford, optimistic. Because every time they do that, they rip on about 10 offensive Rams players (and sometimes 11 defensive players) to come to his rescue. It is the bad coaching, it is horrible receiver play, bad o-line, old running back. The defense let Peterson run wild, so it's not really Bradfords fault, even though he gave up the same amount of points as he scored in the first 3 quarters of the game.

It gets frustrating to see people in here making it 21 other Rams players fault every time he has a bad game - and then turn around a say: "I told you so", every time the Rams win. Don't mind you that win is build on a sound defensive performances (The Bills game).

It's not the past that is dragging people down. It is the present. We have been ranked bottom 6th on offense in all seasons with Bradford at the helm.
He is not bad. He is average. On a less then average Rams offense. But average wasn't what the doctor ordered. You can get average for far less then 12 million a year.

However as the OP said. You give him a season more to prove he can be more than average. Show us he can improve even more, has he have improved this year. You can't move on from him. Yet. But that doesn't mean you can't call him average, when he is playing average. Or call him out when he is playing poorly.

It's not the past that is dragging people down. It is the present. The Rams are playing bad offensive football right now. This season! It's the present that is dragging people down.

If you wanna talk about optimism and playoffs next year, we could start up a thread talking about how our defense is putting up a top 10 season (with some breakdowns along the way), build up of young and promising players - and are maybe only two safeties and a little seasoning away from being something special.

---

You bring up valid points. This gets me every time:

1. Every time Bradford plays bad and we lose...it's everyone else's fault! "Bradford is the least of our worries"

2. However, every time we win..."What did I tell you? Bradford is the real deal."


Huh? The logic doesn't correlate. If Bradford does bad, it's because of everyone else. If Bradford does good, it's Bradford.

It most certainly couldn't have been the fact that the rest of the offense stepped up could it?



I agree that just because Bradford is being paid a lot of money and is one of the faces of this franchise does not make him immune to judgement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supachump

Uhh. No.


The analogy is pretty sound. Whether I agree or not, I don't know. I'm pretty bummed out about Bradford. I wish he were doing better. He isn't very impressive to me. But, at the same time I don't think there is a better option at this point. Not that my or any of our opinions matter.

---

See, I watched him back when he was in Oklahoma. He looked mighty impressive. And I'm not talking about the rest of the offense. I'm talking about his skillset.

However, he just hasn't impressed me enough yet in his NFL career. Sure he's had some great moments here and there but as a whole he is a little bit above average in my eyes.