[moklerman]

Yeah, I think the Warner quotes aren't as negative as some would suggest. I do think they're valid but need to be considered along with what Bradford was dealing with. I agree that Bradford didn't take a lot of risks downfield but I also think that he was justified in those decisions. Perhaps Bradford's mistrust in his o-line and receivers went too far at some point but after all the drops and passes bouncing off of receivers, not to mention the likely poor route running and recognition by the receivers, I can easily see where Bradford dialed things back.

At least a few, if not more of Bradford's interceptions have come at the fault of the WR from what I've seen.

Also, I find it hard to believe that Bradford wasn't under orders. He's always been a "good soldier" and does what he's instructed to. I'd bet money that both Spagnuolo and Fisher have continually coached him to not turn the ball over as a mantra. Everything else is secondary.

P.S. Good to see you ZN. I look forward to seeing your posts here. I lurk over at the Original Herd/Rams Rule but I hate the format so I don't post much there.

[Elvis]

I don't know if i'd call Bradford afraid exactly but for my money he favored the sideline and dump offs too much over attacking the middle of the field.

Hi. thanks for the welcome. I promise in the future this will not be my only topic.

As for your statement I quote? There will be different opinions on a controversial figure but I really don't think that was him. I think that was the offense accounting for who and what they had. For example once Britt was signed and Quick was finally coming through, the Rams made a real effort to attack the middle of the field, including deep medium routes. It' just that we only saw that in the 2014 pre-season.

As for checking down and dumping off, to me that's just an inaccurate perception. That sounds blunt but it's honest. I see why people get that impression but that's not the impression I got and the numbers don't back the idea that he was a dump-off king (not your words but forget it, I'm on a roll...Animal House reference.) As I said, PFF has his 7th in attempts of 20 yards or more in 2012. I did the numbers myself on attempts of 31+ yards for 2012 and 2013 combined and his percentage of total attempts in that range was very healthy, right up there. I also did the numbers on Amendola for his career and the only year where he has any real presence on passes of 20 yards or more is in 2012. So at least they tried to make the most of what they had. It goes on and on.

(That stuff is all posted somewhere and is retrievable, but I am short on time this week and so just have to wing it.)

Plus, again, you look at the comebacks, and it's not even debatable. He is hitting the deep medium routes in the middle on those (15-20 yarders). What I always saw with the conservative Bradford was a qb who was supposed to minimize mistakes with a sub-par receiving corps until it was time to unleash it, such as for example...4th quarter comeback situations. I also thought that was all going to be cured in 2014, but then, the rest is history...which is why we're discussing history.

Well we'll never know what would have been in 2014 but i'm really looking forward to 2015. Chip Kelly is a coach who wants to aggressively attack defenses from the get go. I'm hoping Sam plays a lot next year, to minimize the draft pick we have to send the Eagles, and because i want to see how he does in CK's offense...

[/zn/]

Also, I find it hard to believe that Bradford wasn't under orders. He's always been a "good soldier" and does what he's instructed to. I'd bet money that both Spagnuolo and Fisher have continually coached him to not turn the ball over as a mantra. Everything else is secondary.

Hi again.

See, again, actually, Bradford did throw long. The numbers back that. He did it at a fairly decent clip, too.

And IMO the team as a whole had an issue throwing 15-25 yarders to the middle of the field, until they had an improved Quick plus Britt.

The captain checkdown thing isn't real.

This is just one possible way to do the numbers. There are others. But here's one approach... provided it's understood we're discussing history. Meaning, the next topic could be "how well did Trent Green play when he filled in for Warner in 2000." History. The past.

This is an old re-cycled post. I compare the qbs of the 12 2014 playoff teams (with one substitution) to Bradford 2012. The substitution is simple--rather than count Arizona's Lindley, which is kind of tilting the field a bit, I subbed in Brees. So really it's 11 of the 2014 playoff qbs, + Brees. I compare them to Bradford in 2012 because that was his last full season.

Using espn splits, I look at 2 things per qb. First, how many attempts of 31 yards or more as a percentage of total attempts. 2nd, how many attempts of 41 yards or more as a percentage of total attempts. As a rule, I round numbers up.

PASSES OF 31+ YARDS, PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL ATTEMPTS

Bradford 2012: 4.9%

Playoff qbs 2014 - Lindley/+ Brees:

Newton 6.7% (with a caveat--he only hit on 4 of 30)
Romo 5.7%
Flacco 5.4%
Roethlisberger 5%
Stafford 4.5%
Luck 4.3%
Manning 4%
Wilson 3.7%
Rodgers 3.5%
Dalton 3.4%
Brees 3%
Brady 2.7%

Bradford: less than Newton, Romo, Flacco, & Roethlisberger. More than Stafford, Luck, Manning, Wilson, Rodgers, Dalton, Brees, & Brady.

PASSES OF 41+ YARDS, PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL ATTEMPTS

Bradford 2012: 1.3%

Playoff qbs 2014 - Lindley/+ Brees:

Roethlisberger 2.1%
Stafford 2%
Flacco 1.9%
Newton 1.8%
Romo 1.6%
Brady 1.3%
Wilson 1.3%
Dalton 1.2%
Brees 1%
Rodgers 0.96%
Luck 0.6%
Manning 0.3%

Bradford: less than Roethlisberger, Stafford, Flacco, Newton, & Romo. Same as Brady & Wilson. More than Dalton, Brees, Rodgers, Luck, and Manning.


...

[Hacksaw]

Welcome to RFU /zn/ .

So our $50+mm Ist pick turned out to be middle of the pack. Bummer. He was let go because of his legs, not his arm. Dude had plenty of lead in that right arm of his. A bit of touch would have helped his completion % too. Sure he had inferior WR's (we think) or an inferior scheme to play in, but I can't remember a game where he put the team on his back and won it because of his stellar play (not that there aren't a few).
I was very disappointed that we lost out on SB and am still not sure it won't click for him in the future. Just didn't seem like that could happen here.
Wishing him well but wishing Nick Foles far better.

[/zn/]

Welcome to RFU /zn/ .

So our $50+mm Ist pick turned out to be middle of the pack.

I don't agree he was middle of the pack at all. My line is this---when he had both a relatively healthy OL and a running threat, he played well. Great in the redzone, capable of playing tough in games against top 10 defenses (including NFC west defenses), capable of comeback wins under those conditions, and capable of making the most that could be made out of green and avg. receivers (who either improved since then or did no better elsewhere if they are among the ones who left).

Unfortunately, the conditions I describe---having both a relatively healthy OL and a running threat---only describes 11 of the 25 games he played under Fisher.

And btw no one needs the "too bad he got hurt" lecture. We all know what happened. The day of the trade I signed on board with it and understood and said it was a fair deal. All this discussion here is, is history...like discussing Bulger. We know about the knees and why he was traded and there's no "too bad" about it.

Meanwhile, Foles, too, will need the same things Bradford did: a relatively healthy OL and a running threat.

Which he probably will get, so he ought to be fine.

,

[Elvis]

And IMO the team as a whole had an issue throwing 15-25 yarders to the middle of the field, until they had an improved Quick plus Britt.

For me this is the issue. Sam had a short game, took shots down the field, but where the real money is made in the NFL, the mid range middle of the field stuff: seam routes, crossing routes, dig routes. That was sorely lacking.

Maybe it was personnel but when Clemens came in in 2013, he attacked the middle of the field a lot more than Bradford did. And a player like Cook is built for the seam route up the middle.

Maybe 2014 was gonna be the year Sam put it all together. We'll never know.

And like i've said a million times now, if healthy, he has a great chance to be his best in Phili...

[Hacksaw]

Welcome to RFU /zn/ .

So our $50+mm Ist pick turned out to be middle of the pack.

I don't agree he was middle of the pack at all. My line is this---when he had both a relatively healthy OL and a running threat, he played well. Great in the redzone, capable of playing tough in games against top 10 defenses (including NFC west defenses), capable of comeback wins under those conditions, and capable of making the most that could be made out of green and avg. receivers (who either improved since then or did no better elsewhere if they are among the ones who left).

Unfortunately, the conditions I describe---having both a relatively healthy OL and a running threat---only describes 11 of the 25 games he played under Fisher.

And btw no one needs the "too bad he got hurt" lecture. We all know what happened. The day of the trade I signed on board with it and understood and said it was a fair deal. All this discussion here is, is history...like discussing Bulger. We know about the knees and why he was traded and there's no "too bad" about it.

Meanwhile, Foles, too, will need the same things Bradford did: a relatively healthy OL and a running threat.

Which he probably will get, so he ought to be fine.

,

Fair enough /zn/. His team was bad but he couldn't elevate them so I will always feel he was less than what we purchased / hoped for. I guess his stint in Philly will be the test. Since they are a solid team he should thrive. If he mucks up the works, well then we know. If his knees go again we may never know what he could have been. I wish him well eithr way (except when it affects the Rams chances for success).

[Elvis]

http://www.nj.com/eagles/index.ssf/2015 ... les_p.html

Sam Bradford will not sign extension with Eagles per report



In something that should not come as a surprise, the Eagles and quarterback Sam Bradford will not come to terms on a contract extension, meaning Bradford will play the 2015 season on a one-year deal worth $12.9 million.

This is according to Ian Rapport of NFL Network.

When the Eagles acquired Bradford from the St. Louis Rams, the first day of free agency and the first day trades were allowed to be made, in exchange for quarterback Nick Foles and a 2016 second-round draft pick, an agent told New Jersey Advance Media then an extension was doubtful.

"Why would he?'' the agent said. "They would really have to knock him over.""

Bradford will earn every dollar of his original rookie contract of $86 million unless the Eagles were to cut him before the start of the season, which is highly unlikely.

For the Eagles to offer him a worthwhile extension it would have had to include over $20 million in up-front money for Bradford to even think twice.

And why would the Eagles do that for a quarterback who missed all of last year with a torn ACL and half of the 2013 season with a torn ACL.

Could you imagine the Eagles agreeing to a new deal, giving him the big money up front and Bradford tearing the ACL again during a training camp practice at the NovaCare Complex the way wide receiver Jeremy Maclin did two years ago?

That would be a total disaster in every way imaginable.

So instead both Bradford and the Eagles will gamble on the 2015 season.

If he gets hurt again, he's likely finished and walks away with another $12.9 million of his $86 million.

If he takes to Chip Kelly's system and has the kind of year the organization and fans hopes he has, he has the leverage. He could stay where he had that "career'' season, or test the free agent market where — unless Seattle lets Russell Wilson go — would probably be the most attractive quarterback on the market.

Either way he would get another big day.

Follow Mark Eckel on Twitter at @MarkEckel08. Find NJ.com Sports on Facebook.Contact Mark Eckel at [email protected].

[Hacksaw]

Makes little sense for the Eagles. Bradford must feel good about his ACL (s)

[Elvis]

OTOH, Bradford might think this is his last year and he doesn't want to play it at a discount...