Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 35
Like Tree15Likes

Thread: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

  1. #16
    chucknbob is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Age
    31
    Posts
    423
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    If we draft a QB to potentially replace Bradford (and I don't think we will) it won't be because of Bradford's performance, development, rehab, or any of that. It will be because of $$$$$. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Sams contract is around 15 million next season. A QB drafted in the top 10 will be a fraction of that price.

    Thanks to the new rookie wage scale is that you don't have to pay your rookie QB $100 million bucks. That frees up a lot of cap space to sign a couple of top tier free agents. Which one would help our team more, Bradford or (insert favorite rookie QB) plus Eric Decker or Ben Tate.

    Again, I'm a Bradford backer, but the money aspect of the NFL is a real deciding factor in a lot of these decisions.


  2. #17
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    18,908
    Rep Power
    147

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    It's clear at this point that the Rams need a legitimate back-up quarterback. Whether they acquire one in free agency (Sanchez) or in the draft, whatever. I think the only downside I see is that having a legit back-up is only going to give more fuel to the fires of those who want to cut/bench Sam, because then they'll have an actual other option to point to. If you're a person who feels the Bradford discussion topics have been obnoxious so far, wait until that new element is in play.

  3. #18
    macrammer's Avatar
    macrammer is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Cal
    Age
    55
    Posts
    1,841
    Rep Power
    27

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    It's clear at this point that the Rams need a legitimate back-up quarterback. Whether they acquire one in free agency (Sanchez) or in the draft, whatever. I think the only downside I see is that having a legit back-up is only going to give more fuel to the fires of those who want to cut/bench Sam, because then they'll have an actual other option to point to. If you're a person who feels the Bradford discussion topics have been obnoxious so far, wait until that new element is in play.
    The great elixir.... Winning. If the Rams (along with Sam) can start to put a winning record and tradition together, I think you will see less and less Bradford critiques......Not sure how much v. really aimed at Sam v. the losing continuing.......

  4. #19
    punahou's Avatar
    punahou is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    HAWAII
    Posts
    582
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Quote Originally Posted by citr92 View Post
    while i'm not a huge bridgewater fan...it's really annoying when people blame the loss on a qb that played just fine, almost 400 yards passing and 2 TDs with no interceptions....and they played a ucf team that's pretty decent

    now i'm sure the rams would HAVE to look at a qb simply cause bradford is injured

    but again...it's not like bradford had a decent team to play with in his career yet
    isnt that QB you talk about on UCF? or was that South Florida?

  5. #20
    punahou's Avatar
    punahou is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    HAWAII
    Posts
    582
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    I think the main reason of the Bradford critiques and QB controversy stems frOm the fact that many recent QBs drafted after Bradford have had much better success than he has had.

    Is the grass greener? I cant answer definatively, but based on what other teams have done and their turn arounds since Bradford entered the league, it sure could be.

  6. #21
    citr92 is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,044
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Quote Originally Posted by punahou View Post
    isnt that QB you talk about on UCF? or was that South Florida?
    well....stonecoldtavonaustin does anyway

    and yea, blake bortles is qb at central florida

    but the one i like is derrick carr at fresno st.

  7. #22
    citr92 is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,044
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Quote Originally Posted by punahou View Post
    I think the main reason of the Bradford critiques and QB controversy stems frOm the fact that many recent QBs drafted after Bradford have had much better success than he has had.

    Is the grass greener? I cant answer definatively, but based on what other teams have done and their turn arounds since Bradford entered the league, it sure could be.
    looking at those teams, they have receivers, a more consistent line...those teams needed a qb but had pieces already in place

    the rams needed everything lol
    DE_Ramfan likes this.

  8. #23
    renrawtruk is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    332
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    looking at those teams, they have receivers, a more consistent line...those teams needed a qb but had pieces already in place
    I could swear we went out and got receivers this year, and added Jake Long?

    I would also contend that Avery, Amendola, Gibson, Givens, Lloyd, Pettis and Kendricks were all NFL caliber receivers. I'm not sure which magical receiver we think we could get that would all of a sudden make Bradford look like a pro-bowl caliber QB?

    Bradford was still playing like Bradford when he got hurt. He did gain a little confidence after playing Jax, didn't need to do much vs. Houston, and definitely wasn't the reason we lost vs. Carolina, so yes, he was starting to look less "below average". And yes, the coaching staff tightened up our Red Zone play, and was awesome.

    But Bradford also played terrible in the few games before that, when facing some pretty good teams. I think too many here are too patient and have developed very low standards after so many years of losing. "Well, Bradford needs 6 weeks to start being able to throw the ball to new young talented receivers". Ummm, that's what pre-season and the offseason is for.

    So he needs 5 years to become a good QB, and 6 regular season games to get used to throwing a football, which is his job. Oh, and I thought this was the same system this year?

    People are seriously like, "ok, we'll start developing Bradford again next year after he comes back from injury and maybe in 2 more years, we'll make the playoffs again."

  9. #24
    citr92 is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,044
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Quote Originally Posted by renrawtruk View Post
    I could swear we went out and got receivers this year, and added Jake Long?

    I would also contend that Avery, Amendola, Gibson, Givens, Lloyd, Pettis and Kendricks were all NFL caliber receivers. I'm not sure which magical receiver we think we could get that would all of a sudden make Bradford look like a pro-bowl caliber QB?

    Bradford was still playing like Bradford when he got hurt. He did gain a little confidence after playing Jax, didn't need to do much vs. Houston, and definitely wasn't the reason we lost vs. Carolina, so yes, he was starting to look less "below average". And yes, the coaching staff tightened up our Red Zone play, and was awesome.

    But Bradford also played terrible in the few games before that, when facing some pretty good teams. I think too many here are too patient and have developed very low standards after so many years of losing. "Well, Bradford needs 6 weeks to start being able to throw the ball to new young talented receivers". Ummm, that's what pre-season and the offseason is for.

    So he needs 5 years to become a good QB, and 6 regular season games to get used to throwing a football, which is his job. Oh, and I thought this was the same system this year?

    People are seriously like, "ok, we'll start developing Bradford again next year after he comes back from injury and maybe in 2 more years, we'll make the playoffs again."
    but dude!!

    just because you go and get people doesn't always mean they magically fit

    the receivers are young, they drop passes, schotty isn't using some of the players entirely right

    penalties have been incredibly horrible to tavon austin

    jake long is one guy, the line has played better, but it's usually the timing of their mistakes that are the worst

    you look at this rams team and see a team that is dynamite?

    no...they're not their yet, they drop passes, miss assignments, run the wrong route, committ penalties

    and they're 3-4...if they were say, 6-1 and playing pretty well, and bradford was the only one struggling, okay there'd be a problem

    thing is, bradford isn't playing all that bad

    he has 10 other guys and 11 guys on the other side of the ball to depend on

    they aren't helping him one bit

    this is THE youngest team in the nfl

    a new qb would make it even worse!

    bradford has had the least amount of help i've seen from a team, multiple coordinators, a constant revolving door of teammates

    people thinking he's the only problem...
    Last edited by citr92; -10-26-2013 at 08:32 PM.

  10. #25
    Trevor's Avatar
    Trevor is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vicenza, Italy From Hagerstown, MD
    Age
    23
    Posts
    1,279
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Oh boy another one of these threads. There is no QB controversy. Just fans with high expectations.
    HUbison likes this.

  11. #26
    RamsFanSam's Avatar
    RamsFanSam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Missouri, United States
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,602
    Rep Power
    67

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Don't get me wrong. I think Sam IS the QB the Rams need. I also think we need a solid backup - and Clemens is NOT solid, nor is Davis or Quinn.

    I also know that IF we draft a decent backup sometime in the first four rounds, there will be those who automatically think that we should start the rookie. This would be a BAD move - Sam has more talent and potential than most of the next draft class (most, not all - and to get someone comparable, it would require wasting a first round pick on a backup).

    The controversy will be only because of fans who expect too much, without basis in reality.
    HUbison likes this.

  12. #27
    itsguud's Avatar
    itsguud is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Newfoundland
    Posts
    1,250
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Optimistically it would be great if Davis performed and we were able to trade Bradford for a high draft pick or two. That would be unreal!

  13. #28
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,506
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Quote Originally Posted by DE_Ramfan View Post
    I get to see a lot of Colts action living here in Indy and I can tell you two things: Luck is probably better than Bradford but the Colts were a hell of a lot better off at 2-14 than the Rams were at 1-15 when both QBs were drafted. One team was in the playoffs and the other team was like 2-14. The talent level on this Rams offense has been abysmal.

    And despite poor play from the Rams defense, Sam was outplaying RG3.

    I know comparing QBs sounds like an apple to another apple but it isn't. You're leaving out the other 10 apples in the basket.
    The bottom line is, I think 4 years is plenty of time to go from 1st pick to pro-bowl caliber Period. So I'm not accepting any more excuses.

    Even with all the issues the Rams have had during his tenure, I should be able to tell if this guy is a pro-bowl QB by now. I still can't, in spite of his last few games. And that is bothersome.

  14. #29
    Haste is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Saint Louis, MO
    Posts
    201
    Rep Power
    3

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFanSam View Post
    Don't get me wrong. I think Sam IS the QB the Rams need. I also think we need a solid backup - and Clemens is NOT solid, nor is Davis or Quinn.

    I also know that IF we draft a decent backup sometime in the first four rounds, there will be those who automatically think that we should start the rookie. This would be a BAD move - Sam has more talent and potential than most of the next draft class (most, not all - and to get someone comparable, it would require wasting a first round pick on a backup).

    The controversy will be only because of fans who expect too much, without basis in reality.
    If we do draft a QB in round 2-4, he should be used as a threat to Sam's starting job to push him even harder.

  15. #30
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,295
    Rep Power
    142

    Re: The Rams and the coming 2014 QB controversy...

    Rodgers (2), RG3, Eli (2), Ryan (2), Brees (3), Newton, Vick

    There's your NFC Pro Bowl QBs since Bradford entered the league. Those 7 men.

    Brees - 183-271, 2290 yards, 67.5%, 19-5, 109.2 rating
    Rodgers - 167/249, 2191 yards, 67.4%, 15-4, 108.0 rating
    Newton - 131/202, 1552 yards, 64.9%, 12-5, 97.6 rating
    Ryan - 205-305, 2223 yards, 67.2%, 14-7, 94.2 rating
    Bradford - 159/262, 1687 yards, 60.7%, 14-4, 90.9 rating
    Vick - 77/141, 1216 yards, 54.6%, 5-3, 86.5 rating
    RG3 - 158/268, 1878 yards, 59.0%, 9-8, 79.2 rating
    Eli - 171-307, 2167 yards, 55.7%, 10-15, 68.4 rating

    And there's Bradford right in the middle of all the NFC's "Pro Bowl caliber" QBs.
    RamsFanSam likes this.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: -03-01-2013, 11:01 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: -06-19-2009, 08:47 PM
  3. Cards Have A Real Quarterback Controversy
    By ramsanddodgers in forum NFL TALK
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: -10-09-2007, 01:21 AM
  4. Is there a QB controversy in Arizona?
    By Nick in forum NFL TALK
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: -10-11-2005, 11:58 AM
  5. Slaten finds controversy again
    By RamDez in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -09-17-2005, 09:30 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •