1 / 3

At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by SoCalRam78
Like we did with Nick Foles. Like extending Kellen Clemens or Tony Banks. Keith Null, Jeff Smoker and TJ Rubley weren't available?

Re: At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by Hacksaw
Today Bradford is taking the Patriots apart in Fox Burrough.

Re: At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by laram
Hacksaw wrote:Today Bradford is taking the Patriots apart in Fox Burrough.



Not really. 120 yards and 2 TD's. Mediocre, but a 100 yard pick 6 and 85 yard punt return makes a BIG difference!!

Re: At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by snackdaddy
laram wrote:
Hacksaw wrote:Today Bradford is taking the Patriots apart in Fox Burrough.



Not really. 120 yards and 2 TD's. Mediocre, but a 100 yard pick 6 and 85 yard punt return makes a BIG difference!!


No, not much by way of stats. But that last throw was impressive. Patriots had momentum after just scoring. 3rd and 11 with over two minutes. If the Patriots woulda got the ball back there I believe they would score. But Bradford stood tall in the pocket under heavy pressure and threw a strike for a first down. That was clutch. Foles is not capable of making that play. Then again, there's a lot of plays he isn't capable of.

Re: At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by Hacksaw
laram wrote:
Hacksaw wrote:Today Bradford is taking the Patriots apart in Fox Burrough.



Not really. 120 yards and 2 TD's. Mediocre, but a 100 yard pick 6 and 85 yard punt return makes a BIG difference!!


I was commenting on scoreboard with out checking stats. Corrected on that but I agree with snack that he mad some plays Foles couldn't have. Bradford is probably better than Foles and today it showed a little.

Re: At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by moklerman
Stats don't tell the story in a game like that. Bradford had that 2nd TD which was clutch. The first down at the end of the game which should have iced it and overall, a win in NE.

Eagles STILL aren't set at WR as Miles Austin was a healthy scratch. Bradford hasn't been putting up big numbers but he's got 4TD/0INT in his last 3 games and has been making some plays. The game-winner vs. Dallas was pretty clutch too.

Re: At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by laram
Well that's offensive...to all the other qb's in the NFL comparing them to Nick Foles! :D

Nick Foles play has been horrid. The worst I've seen in sometime.

On a side note, Sam Bradford has thrown 10 INT's 3 in the endzone, and has been out yet again with injury. So color me skeptical.

I'm glad he moved on.

Re: At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by moklerman
I'd still rather the Rams had kept Bradford and if Philly doesn't re-sign him, I hope he comes back. Along with a new HC and OC.

Re: At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by snackdaddy
laram wrote:Well that's offensive...to all the other qb's in the NFL comparing them to Nick Foles! :D

Nick Foles play has been horrid. The worst I've seen in sometime.

On a side note, Sam Bradford has thrown 10 INT's 3 in the endzone, and has been out yet again with injury. So color me skeptical.

I'm glad he moved on.


I don't have a problem with the trade. Bradford's injury history made it too difficult to rely on him. And at the time Foles seemed like he couldn't be any worse. But something to happened to Foles. He has totally lost his confidence. He wasn't known for being especially accurate before and now he's even worse. On the first hint of pressure he can't read what's happening in front of him.

He's showing all the signs of being Bulgerized or a battered quarterback. It started with the Green Bay game. Mighta been from the Matthews hit. He has not been the same quarterback since. He might be damaged goods. And he might be past the point of no return.

It doesn't help that the offense in general is just plain bad. You need 3 components for a successful pass play. The receiver has to get open. The quarterback has to deliver a catchable ball. And the receiver has to make the catch. All 3 of those things have to happen and rarely happens on 3rd down. One time it might be no one can get open. Another time it could be a drop. And it could be a bad, uncatchable pass. All 3 of those things happen most the time on 3rd down.

So no, as bad as Foles looks, he isn't the only one who plays poorly. Which is why they end up with 3 points. And that was after a long Gurley run. Not a pass.

Re: At least Philly didn't extend Bradford

PostPosted:9 years 7 months ago
by dieterbrock
Good grief, we are so brainwashed by bad QB play that Bradford actually looked good today?
Philly had 248 yards of total offense and was behind 14-0
1 good drive by Bradford in the 1st half.
Pick 6, block punt TD and Punt return TD account 3/5th of the scoring
No doubt Bradford play is superior to Foles, but that isnt saying much when Foles is the worst QB starting in the league.