[azramsfan93]

I don't personally share any of this antipathy to Bradford.

Not sure what fuels it after he was traded away.

I only even mention it for a sense of balance.

I've often wondered if it's any one thing. For some, it's because he wasn't Suh. For others, it's because he had a large rookie deal. After that, it becomes a bit more murky. Some were probably disappointed because of his draft position that he wasn't the next Peyton Manning.

But I was always surprised at the response to him getting injured. People seemed to hate him for it.

I don't know him, but I think Sam is a nice guy.

As a QB, I think he lacks pocket presence and toughness. He is terrible under pressure. As a fan, the first overall pick/Heisman trophy winner needs to play better than Brian Hoyer. He has always been a disappointment.

[snackdaddy]

You know, drafting him at the time was a good move. He graded out to be a possible franchise quarterback. He had all the measurables. Franchise quarterbacks are hard to come by. So it wasn't a bad decision at the time. I don't fault Spagnuolo for that.

Just like I don't fault Fisher for giving up on him and trading for Foles. They both showed ability but Bradford was injury prone. Made sense because it appeared to be a wash as far as their play. And we get the guy who isn't always hurt. But who foresaw Foles flopping so bad? Neither worked out. It happens. Life in the NFL. It ain't an exact science.

[/zn/]

I don't personally share any of this antipathy to Bradford.

Not sure what fuels it after he was traded away.

I only even mention it for a sense of balance.

I've often wondered if it's any one thing. For some, it's because he wasn't Suh. For others, it's because he had a large rookie deal. After that, it becomes a bit more murky. Some were probably disappointed because of his draft position that he wasn't the next Peyton Manning.

But I was always surprised at the response to him getting injured. People seemed to hate him for it.

I don't know him, but I think Sam is a nice guy.

As a QB, I think he lacks pocket presence and toughness. He is terrible under pressure. As a fan, the first overall pick/Heisman trophy winner needs to play better than Brian Hoyer. He has always been a disappointment.

I never expected Bradford to be elite which is what I said before they drafted him in 2010. I did however expect him to be good (ie. Flacco/Eli class good), and when he was not playing behind injury damaged lines with the Rams, he was. (Unfortunately, there are only 11 games total under Fisher where Bradford played with both a running threat [ie. not Richardson] and a relatively healthy OL.) I said he would do well in Phil, and after a rough start, he did...his last 7 games he averaged a 98 qb rating.

In terms of playing under pressure, that to me is exaggerated IMO. PFF ranked him 1st among 2015 qbs in accuracy under pressure, and that's in spite of being 2nd in most drops by receivers when throwing under pressure: https://www.profootballfocus.com/data/s ... 4-15-16-17

He also had a decent sack percentage when throwing under pressure (ranked 13th) which means that he wasn't taking sacks or showing a lack of pocket presence---he was throwing the ball well under pressure.

I think overall a lot of Rams issues got attributed to Bradford that simply were not on Bradford. I think a lot of the criticisms just evaporate when you look closer.

Either way, just for the record, when the Foles trade happened, I said I was fine with it...I got that the Rams felt they couldn't risk it after 2 knees. What I like everyone else didn't know was that Foles would go through a major meltdown. Either way, IMO if you defend the trade when it happens, you shrug at that and move on. So I am not doing a "they never shoulda traded him" routine.

.

.,

[moklerman]

That's some good stuff, ZN. And I agree that there is a stigma to Bradford that isn't warranted. Using last year as an example, he was very tough in the pocket, waiting for plays to develop and making accurate throws while being hit.

Bradford's biggest problem is that he's, for the most part, been in offenses dependent on the threat of an effective running game and most of the time, he hasn't had one. Again, 2015 being a good example. Instead of having a McCoy type RB threatening the defense, the Eagles essentially had NO running game, which in turn put a top on the defense which restricted the deep game. Even still, Bradford was pretty accurate with his deep throws.

But that leads to his ineffective receivers. To Rams fans that's all too familiar and at this point, just an excuse. But it is valid. Bradford was throwing to Riley Cooper and Miles Austin for much of the first half of the season. I can see why some would be done with the "excuses" but as absurd as it might be to think Bradford's always had bad receivers, it's actually true.

Yes, it's hard to accept but I think that's still more plausible than to assume that Bradford throws an uncatchable ball.

The guy has just had a lot of bad football luck IMO. And, once again, he's going to be going into a season having to learn a new system and new personnel. Let the guy have some stability and I think he's easily a top 10 QB.

[azramsfan93]

I've often wondered if it's any one thing. For some, it's because he wasn't Suh. For others, it's because he had a large rookie deal. After that, it becomes a bit more murky. Some were probably disappointed because of his draft position that he wasn't the next Peyton Manning.

But I was always surprised at the response to him getting injured. People seemed to hate him for it.

I don't know him, but I think Sam is a nice guy.

As a QB, I think he lacks pocket presence and toughness. He is terrible under pressure. As a fan, the first overall pick/Heisman trophy winner needs to play better than Brian Hoyer. He has always been a disappointment.

I never expected Bradford to be elite which is what I said before they drafted him in 2010. I did however expect him to be good (ie. Flacco/Eli class good), and when he was not playing behind injury damaged lines with the Rams, he was. (Unfortunately, there are only 11 games total under Fisher where Bradford played with both a running threat [ie. not Richardson] and a relatively healthy OL.) I said he would do well in Phil, and after a rough start, he did...his last 7 games he averaged a 98 qb rating.

In terms of playing under pressure, that to me is exaggerated IMO. PFF ranked him 1st among 2015 qbs in accuracy under pressure, and that's in spite of being 2nd in most drops by receivers when throwing under pressure: https://www.profootballfocus.com/data/s ... 4-15-16-17

He also had a decent sack percentage when throwing under pressure (ranked 13th) which means that he wasn't taking sacks or showing a lack of pocket presence---he was throwing the ball well under pressure.

I think overall a lot of Rams issues got attributed to Bradford that simply were not on Bradford. I think a lot of the criticisms just evaporate when you look closer.

Either way, just for the record, when the Foles trade happened, I said I was fine with it...I got that the Rams felt they couldn't risk it after 2 knees. What I like everyone else didn't know was that Foles would go through a major meltdown. Either way, IMO if you defend the trade when it happens, you shrug at that and move on. So I am not doing a "they never shoulda traded him" routine.

.

.,

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

The only thing I challenge in your post is putting Sam anywhere near the caliber of Flacco or Eli, who both proved they had what it took to win big games (4 Super Bowls and all the playoff games leading up to them).

I think history will side with me.

[azramsfan93]

The guy has just had a lot of bad football luck IMO. And, once again, he's going to be going into a season having to learn a new system and new personnel. Let the guy have some stability and I think he's easily a top 10 QB.

Bad football luck? He has been around long enough that the sample size is adequate. The common denominator in all your dysfunctional relationships is you. The simplest explanation is usually correct. If you are trying to make the case that Sam is not at fault for his issues - it's everyone else's fault - you lost me right there.

There is no argument that Sam has ever been top 10 in anything in the NFL. Wishful thinking I guess?

[/zn/]

The only thing I challenge in your post is putting Sam anywhere near the caliber of Flacco or Eli, who both proved they had what it took to win big games

Flacco and Eli both disprove the idea that wins go to the qb. When their OLs both fell apart in 2013, neither qb looked very good.

And Flacco especially is an illustration of that. He is living proof--or, better, just another example of the fact--that adding a qb to an established team is better than building from scratch with a new qb. The Ravens went to the playoffs 4 years running before they actually won a superbowl. He's good, he was just drafted on to a playoff team. When the team fell apart around him he didn't do as well as an individual player, measured by any metric you want to use.

So when I compare qbs I compare their skill sets. I don't assume that the record tells you what they're like. I assume the record tells you what the entire team + head coach is like.

And btw along with opinions I am posting facts. For example, it is NOT a fact that SB is poor under pressure...it IS a fact that last year he was ranked first in terms of accuracy under pressure. Facts like that are important in discussions like this.

.

[Elvis]

The only stigma is Bradford has never been a winner.

He's 25-37-1 as a starter, never had a winning season, never been to the playoffs. And his stats are mediocre.

We can talk all day about why that may or may not be his fault but there's nothing wrong with thinking Sam hasn't distinguished himself in the NFL. He hasn't.

[Bartman31]

but 50 mil guaranteed?? ouch

[/zn/]

The only stigma is Bradford has never been a winner.

He's 25-37-1 as a starter, never had a winning season, never been to the playoffs. And his stats are mediocre.

We can talk all day about why that may or may not be his fault but there's nothing wrong with thinking Sam hasn't distinguished himself in the NFL. He hasn't.

I don't do the "qb uber alles" thing.

Teams win or lose. Teams with problems drag the qbs down with them---unless it's a rare exceptional guy like Brady, but even then things like damaged OLs catch up with them.

According to the W/L calculation, in 2015 Hoyer and Taylor were as good as if not better than Flacco, Luck, Eli, Ryan, and Brees.

There were a lot of reasons the teams Bradford was on did not win. As I said, a lot of that gets put on him but when you look closer, that kind of argument evaporates.

..