A question to the people who think Bradford is not the Answer.

[Judaxi]

For the past two years I have been lurking on this site as well as a few others. I post every now and then but find that most discussions turn into arguments and controlling my own feelings on the matter become difficult. The one subject that really gets me heated is Sam Bradford. I am in the camp that believes he is our franchise QB and has the potential to be an elite one at the NFL level. I can understand a few of the concerns that people have about him but I think some of the hate is over the top.

With that said I do not live in St. Louis. I was born and raised in Maryland and listen to a lot of Baltimore sports talk radio. As most of you know Joe Falcco has yet to show much improvement the past two years and a lot of the fans here want to get rid of him. This always leads to the question that I want to ask the Bradford naysayers:

What QB either available in FA, the draft, or through trade would you rather see. A lot of people want to move on from Bradford but move onto what? I am truly interested to hear what available QB you honestly think is better than Bradford.

[emuen]

First of all: Of course some of the "haters" are over the top, welcome to the internet

One of the frustrating things about having Sam Bradford not deliver is: You can't move on from him. His to expensive to bench or cut. Also there are no available QB who is better! Does that mean that he is the answer for the Rams? No, it doesn't. It just means we will have to learn to live with him, for now. And that can be frustrating when he doesn't perform as you wanted him to. The same was the case when the ****** drafted Alex Smith. He wasn't playing well, but they always ended up going back to him, because the alternatives wasn't good. However that didn't make him a great QB, or the answer for the ******. Ironically enough they apparently found Smiths replacement while he was putting together his best season yet.

All we can do is hope for Bradford to improve. Because upgrading the position is not an option.
And all on this forum want to see him improve. After all, they don't hate Bradford, they just hate that he isn't playing like a franchise QB.

[richtree]

I think what makes it tough is that we could have had RGII but Sam shouldn't be compared to him.

Inevitability, the Rams (and Bradford) have one more season to make the offense "work".

When you see guys like RGIII, Cam, Luck, Russell Wilson and even Kapernick/Weeden all have some immediate success.

Right now Bradford and the Rams offense has never truly proved to be a threat.

We opted to go Sam, Brockers, Jenkins, Quick and more picks this year over RGIII and any other QB.

To answer your question honestly, I THINK EVERYONE WANTS THREE THINGS FROM THE RAMS QB:

#1 -- Bradford to show improvement, work in the weight room, and off-season strides of an injury free off-season

#2 -- Bradford should rise the talent of the players around him. I am sure a Drew Brees would be putting up 400 yard games in the EJD even with our talent.

#3 -- Develop a backup QB and a deep passing attack. The QB of the Rams has to be more than a game manager. The QB has to be a threat to score the ball on every play and make audibles to burn the defense.

[AvengerRam]

My question to those who think Bradford "is not the answer" is:

What do you think the question is?

[laram0]

My question to those who think Bradford "is not the answer" is:

What do you think the question is?

Who is the QB of the New England Patriots?

[Rambos]

I think what makes it tough is that we could have had RGII but Sam shouldn't be compared to him.

Inevitability, the Rams (and Bradford) have one more season to make the offense "work".

When you see guys like RGIII, Cam, Luck, Russell Wilson and even Kapernick/Weeden all have some immediate success.

Right now Bradford and the Rams offense has never truly proved to be a threat.

We opted to go Sam, Brockers, Jenkins, Quick and more picks this year over RGIII and any other QB.

To answer your question honestly, I THINK EVERYONE WANTS THREE THINGS FROM THE RAMS QB:

#1 -- Bradford to show improvement, work in the weight room, and off-season strides of an injury free off-season

#2 -- Bradford should rise the talent of the players around him. I am sure a Drew Brees would be putting up 400 yard games in the EJD even with our talent.

#3 -- Develop a backup QB and a deep passing attack. The QB of the Rams has to be more than a game manager. The QB has to be a threat to score the ball on every play and make audibles to burn the defense.

When you see guys like RGIII, Cam, Luck, Russell Wilson and even Kapernick/Weeden all have some immediate success.

Bradford had immediate success in his rookie year. Immediate success does not mean anything... Cam put up big numbers his rookie year. In his second year he has been a train wreck as a leader of the team.

Not really sure how many of these young QBs have won anything in the NFL yet. Heck do you remember a guy named Rick Mirer. If not Google him and see how that worked out LONG TERM.....

A lot of QB come in and play well early does not mean they will ever be a franchise long term QB.

To answer your question honestly, I THINK EVERYONE WANTS THREE THINGS FROM THE RAMS QB:

#1 -- Bradford to show improvement, work in the weight room, and off-season strides of an injury free off-season

He has shown improvement... Not sure why you think most fans want to see him get bigger or stronger. He had a ankle injury and has shown he can take a pounding. I think most fans don't want to see him get hit as much.

#2 -- Bradford should rise the talent of the players around him. I am sure a Drew Brees would be putting up 400 yard games in the EJD even with our talent.

Again he took this team to a title game in his rookie year with the same players that only won one game before he got here. Kind of hard to prove he is not already doing that.

#3 -- Develop a backup QB and a deep passing attack. The QB of the Rams has to be more than a game manager. The QB has to be a threat to score the ball on every play and make audibles to burn the defense.

You want Sam to develop the backup QB? Not sure that falls in his job description. You have to understand that not every scheme is asking a QB to throw the ball 50-60 times a game. I don't have to look to far back to see when the Rams ask him to throw the ball 50 plus times he had Drew brees type numbers. It''s not that Sam can't or does not have the skill sets to do that. It's what they are asking him to do. I can't rip SJax for not getting 100 yards every game, when he only gets 10-20 touches a game.

I was thinking the other day. If I was 13 when the GSOT was around, I would think that is the norm. I would be in my 20's but always thinking that's what the Rams offense should look like.

[MauiRam]

What QB either available in FA, the draft, or through trade would you rather see. A lot of people want to move on from Bradford but move onto what? I am truly interested to hear what available QB you honestly think is better than Bradford.

I don't know great the 2013 rookie class of O-linemen is at this point, but I'd rather spend both our 1st round picks on two tackles, or a tackle and a guard than pass judgement on Sam at this point. Let's surround him with some talent and PROTECTION before we come to conclusions about his abilities to excel in the NFL. If we are still a six win team or less after the 2014 season concludes, then this question might have some relevance - along with a lot of others ...

[MACD]

I was thinking the other day. If I was 13 when the GSOT was around, I would think that is the norm. I would be in my 20's but always thinking that's what the Rams offense should look like.

Winner! And therein lies the problem on this board.

Hey, that's what the OU offense looked like when Sam ran it. I have every confidence that by year 4 Sam will be approaching that level because I have every confidence that Fish is committed to o-line upgrading and WR development. I'm just enjoying the ride there. We way overachieved in Sam's rookie year if you ask me. It's gonna be fun watching this team progress under Fish and company...it's really Year One if you ask me.

[emuen]

You have to understand that not every scheme is asking a QB to throw the ball 50-60 times a game. I don't have to look to far back to see when the Rams ask him to throw the ball 50 plus times he had Drew brees type numbers.

But then again, if you watch the game film, there really wasn't anything Drew Brees about his performance. The problem with stats is that you think they tell something conclusively about a players performance in a game. But they don't.

I was thinking the other day. If I was 13 when the GSOT was around, I would think that is the norm. I would be in my 20's but always thinking that's what the Rams offense should look like.


Winner! And therein lies the problem on this board.

I don't think I understand this one. What problem?

[Rambos]

But then again, if you watch the game film, there really wasn't anything Drew Brees about his performance. The problem with stats is that you think they tell something conclusively about a players performance in a game. But they don't.

I agree that stats don't tell what happened in that game. The point I'm making is how many games this year does Bradford come out and throw the ball 35-50 plus times?

The only reason he did in that game is as we all know we fell way behind. It's not like the Rams will come into a game and have Bradford throw a ton of passes and try and blow out a team.

Drew Brees Att 574
Tom Brady Att 560
Matthew Stafford 629
Matt Ryan 539

Sam Bradford 482

It's clear to me that the top passers in the NFL are throwing the ball a lot more then we are. Drew has almost thrown 100 more passes then Sam.

What was not like Drew Brees in that game? Bradford had two turnovers and threw for a ton of yards and three TDs. We lost. Seems like a lot of games Drew has played in this year too me. How am I wrong?

[TorontoRam]

Winner! And therein lies the problem on this board.

Hey, that's what the OU offense looked like when Sam ran it. I have every confidence that by year 4 Sam will be approaching that level because I have every confidence that Fish is committed to o-line upgrading and WR development. I'm just enjoying the ride there. We way overachieved in Sam's rookie year if you ask me. It's gonna be fun watching this team progress under Fish and company...it's really Year One if you ask me.

What similarities and differences do you see between the OU offense and NFL offenses including the Rams and the QB skills required to run them; the differences between the skill levels of the defensive players in the NCAA and the NFL. For me that's the answer to the question. I'd be interested in your answer to my question. Thanks and happy holidays.

[emuen]

What was not like Drew Brees in that game? Bradford had two turnovers and threw for a ton of yards and three TDs. We lost. Seems like a lot of games Drew has played in this year too me. How am I wrong?

In any way significant to the point. When you think of Drew Brees you think of great offensive football, with a lot of yards and a lot of TDs. Yes he throws interception, because he attacks the opponent down field.
You don't think of dinking and dunking the ball against a prevent defense.
Sure you don't throw interceptions, and the yards and TDs look good on your stats. But it won't get you back in the game. That is why defenses uses prevent.

The thing I like about Brees, and Luck also, is that they don't just take what the defense gives them. They throw it down field when they have to. What is the point of having a QB throwing few interceptions if your already losing? If you need four scores in the last quarter then playing it safe and throwing short doesn't get the job done in time.

Now I would like to clarify: this doesn't mean that I agree that throwing it right in the hands of a safety, four yards deep, is showing you have "it" - while making a comeback drive. Then it's still just dink and dunk.

[RockinRam]

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.

[Rambos]

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.

I don't know of any blue chip stocks that I own where the performance is directly effected by another stock I own? In this case my receivers stock has a direct impact on my QB stock. I own mutual funds where the return is tied together with all the stocks held in the fund.

But if Bradford is a stock the chart would show after we bought it, it went up and then the following year it went down and this year it's at an all time high.

Don't you buy Blue chips stocks for the long term play? Why would you not like it's now when it performing?

[39WillRunYaOva]

Of course Brees could do good with this WR corp thats why he is Drew Brees,he has perfected his craft and is a elite top 4 QB.Are you really holding Sam to that standard and actually expect that??With that mindset every QB sucks other than the top 5 because according to that logic they could do better.Horrible mindset