Rams "Elseworlds" Poll: Bradford and the GSOT

[AvengerRam]

If you are a comic book reader (or, like me, used to be) you might be familiar with the term "Elseworlds," which described a series of books in which characters were taken from their normal context and placed in a different reality.

Using this framework, here's my "perfect for the bye week" poll question:

If Sam Bradford had been the QB during the GSOT years, what would the result have been?

[AvengerRam]

I went with the second option.

I think Bradford's accuracy would have made him an excellent fit in the GSOT offense, and I think with Faulk, Bruce, Holt, Pace and the rest, they would still have been dominant.

The one quality, though, that Warner had that Bradford does not is the "internal clock" that allowed Kurt to make big throws down the field a split second before taking a big hit. Warner's fearlessness in the pocket may have been (along with the Martz scheme) the catalyst for his undoing in St. Louis, but it is also what made him extra special.

Sam would have enjoyed that offense, though. At least for 2-3 seasons.

[svh01]

Hard question to answer, but as a comic "geek" I had to answer. I think Sam is good, so the offense would have been still good. Not sure if they would have been dominate. The offense was about quick reads and timing, Sam is still working on those aspects. Right now he still holds the ball a little too long (for whatever reason). He has the talent though.

I will say that I think Sam is plenty tough. Judged by the beating he has taken and still improving shows he is tough physically and more importantly mentally.

[mh-i]

Warner > Bradford. Enough said.

[AvengerRam]

Warner > Bradford. Enough said.

Wow. That's twice in an hour that you've completely missed the point of a topic. Maybe you should read slower.

[laram0]

I went with option 2.

I do question whether Bradford could have got along with the Mad Mike though?

[RAMFANRAIDERHATER]

Warner is a future HOF'er... The numbers for Bradford would still be good but I don't think they'd match those of Kurt Warner. As someone else said, Kurt was very good at reading a defense, finding the hot read, exploiting a defensive blitz and getting rid of the ball quickly.

Bradford is still developing those skills and may never be equal to Kurt in all those areas.

With the tremendous tools Warner had at his disposal, it would be difficult for Bradford NOT to play well and put up some gaudy numbers of his own. But Warner was really special. His accuracy was uncanny. His ability to hit a receiver in stride was as good as anyone I have ever seen. I think his playing time in arena ball really helped him with his quick timing and quick decision making.

The Rams would still have been very good offensively, but a tad below the GSOT with Bradford at the helm.

[Rambos]

I don't think Bradford could have stepped in his rookie year and took us to the SB. Warner had a lot of experience from his time overseas to the arena leagues run and shoot.

I think Bradford would have put up big numbers early because he kinda did with the non HOF roster he had in his rookie year.

It would have been interesting to see the Martz and Bradford dynamic. Av you posted the INT to pass ratio and showing how low Bradford's INT to pass attempt. When I was reading that it made me think, does Bradford have that gun singer mentality. Can a coach bring that out of a guy. Bradford is so good at not turning it over and or forcing it.

I read an article where Marc said that when he came off the field after checking the ball down. Martz would get in his face and call him chicken! He would ride his QB hard. I wounder how Bradford would deal with that aspect.

Sam is standing in there now and taking shots as he's trying to get the ball down field, I can see him doing that. Sam is smart enough to learn the 160 plus plays a week.

I do think Sam would put up sick numbers.

[DE_Ramfan]

I'm not saying Warner is bad but it's not like he left the Rams and continued to put up ground shaking numbers. He came off the bench in AZ before having a couple of good seasons at the very end. And those teams won what... 9 and 10 games?

Looking at the GSOT is a perfect example of why you can't throw Bradford under the bus just yet. Look at all the weapons that Kurt had. Would anyone from our team even make that team's roster other than SJ (on the offense)?

Sam is tough. He hangs in as long as he can hoping someone gets open. He takes hard shots trying to deliver the ball. Plug him into a team like they had during the GSOT and I bet he explodes.

[Rambos]

I'm not saying Warner is bad but it's not like he left the Rams and continued to put up ground shaking numbers. He came off the bench in AZ before having a couple of good seasons at the very end. And those teams won what... 9 and 10 games?

Looking at the GSOT is a perfect example of why you can't throw Bradford under the bus just yet. Look at all the weapons that Kurt had. Would anyone from our team even make that team's roster other than SJ (on the offense)?

Sam is tough. He hangs in as long as he can hoping someone gets open. He takes hard shots trying to deliver the ball. Plug him into a team like they had during the GSOT and I bet he explodes.

I think you need to look at the numbers he put up in AZ they are almost the same as he did with the Rams.

[mh-i]

Wow. That's twice in an hour that you've completely missed the point of a topic. Maybe you should read slower.

I understand just fine. In my opinion if Sam Bradford was the starting QB for the GSOT it wouldn't have turned out the same. In my opinion the offense would not have been as dominant. Why? In my opinion Sam Bradford is nowhere near the QB that Kurt Warner was. How did I miss the point?

PS I don't think there would have been as much of a drop off with Trent Green. I base that on Trent Green looking great in the pre season that year prior to getting injured. The offense was basically designed for him.

[DE_Ramfan]

I think you need to look at the numbers he put up in AZ they are almost the same as he did with the Rams.

I did look at his numbers and like I said I'm not saying Kurt wasn't any good in AZ but those numbers aren't setting the league on fire.

Don't get me wrong - they're good numbers, and almost GSOT level. But like they say, almost only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. If we gave this team credit for almost making blocks, almost catching the ball, almost making the right reads and almost getting in the end zone we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[DE_Ramfan]

I understand just fine. In my opinion if Sam Bradford was the starting QB for the GSOT it wouldn't have turned out the same. In my opinion the offense would not have been as dominant. Why? In my opinion Sam Bradford is nowhere near the QB that Kurt Warner was. How did I miss the point?

PS I don't think there would have been as much of a drop off with Trent Green. I base that on Trent Green looking great in the pre season that year prior to getting injured. The offense was basically designed for him.

You know who else has looked pretty good in preseason - Sam Bradford.

[AvengerRam]

I understand just fine. In my opinion if Sam Bradford was the starting QB for the GSOT it wouldn't have turned out the same. In my opinion the offense would not have been as dominant. Why? In my opinion Sam Bradford is nowhere near the QB that Kurt Warner was. How did I miss the point?

If you perceived this as a "Who is better, Kurt or Sam" thread, you totally missed the point.

The question is whether Sam could have run the GSOT. Some might argue that the supporting cast was so good that you didn't need a HOF QB to run it. Others might argue that Kurt was essential, and Sam could not replace him in that role without a significant dropoff. That's the point (which everyone else pretty much got).

[mh-i]

If you perceived this as a "Who is better, Kurt or Sam" thread, you totally missed the point.

The question is whether Sam could have run the GSOT. Some might argue that the supporting cast was so good that you didn't need a HOF QB to run it. Others might argue that Kurt was essential, and Sam could not replace him in that role without a significant dropoff. That's the point (which everyone else pretty much got).

Clearly, I got it by my answer. I don't know how I could be any clearer. You're just uber touchy about Bradford criticism hence all the Sam threads. Sorry I didn't give the answer you would have liked.