Austin Davis

wv wrote:

Well, you always seem to dismiss any ‘pocket presense’
or ‘pocket attributes’ stuff.

Do you not think some QBs have better
“pocket attributes” (for laack of a better term)
than others?

No I don’t dismiss that. I just thought that when it came to Bradford, the issue was exaggerated. In fact, badly exaggerated.

Of course you have to have some physical and mental pre-reqs to play qb.

But then explain the difference between his miserable, sack-taking lack of PP in game 1 versus the improved version in game 2.

Davis himself said it came from listening to coaches, who stressed all week that he needed to stay in rhythm, drop plant and throw.

Now to do THAT he needed to trust the receivers, which to a large extent, he can and does.

Plus the looking downfield while moving thing. You know for a couple of years there that was one big complaint about Davis…that he DIDN’T do that. Then this summer he started doing it. That HAS TO come from coaches finally drilling it in.

I just believe something Warner says, in interview after interview. He said it when Bulger was the qb, and he said it when Bradford was the qb. He said that he knew from experience that oftentimes, things that are put on the qb are really the context around him. He said that the average viewer just cannot see these things. Now granted you have to be able to play the position, but then, think of the advantages Davis had that were simply not there in game one:

* coaches had not seen him live under real fire before, and they saw flaws they corrected

* the receivers in game one kept ruining drives with mistakes and penalties…that decreased after game 1

* plus the receivers are better than they have been in years

* the OL in game 1 was CLEARLY out of sync, and got better

* they found the running game

* he got the reps with the #1s in practice

* the coaches gameplanned around HIM, instead of around someone else

* given all those advantages, he fed off his own confidence…and this can never be under-estimated.

* AND with that, he had confidence in the offensive players. If you want to see what went wrong with Bradford over the years in his worst games, it was precisely this IMO…he pressed when he did not have confidence the offense could execute. What impressed me about Hill is, he stayed at the same level even though he did NOT have that advantage in game 1.

You add all those things together, and Davis–who was the exact same guy with only one week’s difference–went from looking REALLY bad in game one to looking pretty good to darn good in games 2 and 3.

Of course he had to be able to play. If you or I had all those advantages and improvements, we still wouldn’t look like Davis in games 2 and 3.

But if you ask how and why a guy can go from looking that bad one week and much better the next, a LOT of it is the play around him, and the coaching.

Warner himself says that kind of thing, over and over. He should know–he did NOT look good in NY and then things got righted in ARZ.

And no I do not think AD has superior pocket sense to Bradford or Hill. I think they are all about equal, and if anything Hill is somewhat better. I think what happened was, AD got put in a better position. Lots of things came together at the same time.

If anything I would rate Hill higher because he was showing good pocket sense under much worse conditions.

.

wv wrote:

===================
zn: “…And no I do not think AD has superior pocket sense to Bradford or Hill. I think they are all about equal, and if anything Hill is somewhat better. I think what happened was, AD got put in a better position. Lots of things came together at the same time…”
===========================

Well, i tend to disagree with all that. I’m not sure, but based on what little ive seen,
i think AD has a more advanced “SET-OF-Pocket-and-NONpocke-Skills” than Bradford.

All the points you listed just relate to the ‘minimum requirements’ for showing
a quarterbacks ‘set of pocket and nonpocket skills’. Yes, you need
coaching and an OLIne and Weapons, and confidence and practice, etc.
But once you have that — the set-of-pocket-and-nonpocket-skills is going
to be on display. That set of skills is not “on or off” its more like a scale of one to ten.

I think AD has more highly developed pocket and nonpocket skills/attributes
than Bradford. But, again, this is a tentative view. Its a small
sample of work from AD. But so far, I like what i see.

At any rate, i like what they have at QB.
Bradford, AD, and an experienced vet in Hill.
Add another kid next year, and QB looks good.

w
v

Then do me a favor. If I recall you didn’t watch the 2nd half of the Vikes game. Give that a shot. Watch how bad Davis is in that game, and then think about why he improved dramatically in a week. And I mean precisely improved his PP in a week.

Simple explanation: he didn’t.

The context for success was better, is what happened. Including the things I listed, and maybe more.

Plus he got coached a little on timing and so on.

What you don’t have in your head, I think, is images of Davis utterly failing, and badly, at precisely what you say he is so good at. Which is what happened in the Vikes game. And once one has those images in one’s head, I submit, then one is kind of forced to explain the difference.

No matter what the answer will be, it will be one form or another of this: something OUTSIDE of Davis improved the situation.

And that’s not to say he lacks the pre-reqs. It IS to say, however, that something people are taking as being all the qb, isn’t.

At any rate, i like what they have at QB.
Bradford, AD, and an experienced vet in Hill.
Add another kid next year, and QB looks good.

Anyway I agree with that.

The Davis thing has me more interested in the engineering of qb efficiency than in comparing this or that particular qb. I think it’s clear they can win with either Bradford or Davis, and it might be true they can win with Davis…we won’t know, really, until we see him against a real defense, when the defense has film on him.

.

Once he had one week of preparation he looked better than Hill.

Where we disagree is there. I don’t think he looked better than Hill, and if anything, Hill looked as good under far more disadvantageous conditions.

I also think Hill would have looked just as good as Davis once the advantages kicked in.

Like–a line better in sync, the WRs not making as many mistakes like play-killing penalties, and a running game. Plus of course the Vikes defense is better than the next 2 defenses the Rams played.

I do believe Hill would have looked just as good with those advantages in games 2 and 3. What I have doubts about is whether Davis would have looked as good in game 1 with those disadvantages, even with prep time with the 1s.

If nothing else that’s just experience. The more experienced Hill was good in bad circumstances.

But when you boil down his play, no, Davis did not look better to me than he did. In fact I was impressed by Hill in game 1. I said so right after the game, and that was when I still thought the INT was on HIM (later we found out he was hurt so trying to throw out of bounds on just one leg and so without the power he needed. So now I attribute the INT to the injury.)

I also think Bradford held his own under bad conditions too. His sack rate and efficiency were both good even in bad circumstances. I can only imagine how well Bradford would be playing now if he had the 2014 offense to work with.

But my challenge to everyone is still this: watch the 2nd half of the Vikes game again and see again how bad Davis was IN TERMS OF POCKET PRESENCE. Then, figure out why he improved dramatically in a week. Whatever it is, it won’t be him alone–it can’t be. Then apply those lessons to other qbs. If AD needed a lot to change to become a better pocket presence type, what does that tell us about the entire pocket presence issue.

GreatRamNTheSky wrote:

Oh come on ZN, The kid was coming cold and got sacked a couple times in the Vikes game. He also put up some pretty decent numbers for one half. What part of culpability do you give to the offensive line for allowing the sack?

I would say what AD did in Tampa and his performance in the Dallas game out weigh anything he did in a spur of the moment appearance in the Vikings game.

Grits

You, my friend, are taking every word of this completely wrong.

At this point, I am not talking about Davis or rating him as a qb. I completely get why he was so bad in the Vikes game and am not holding it against him. What’s going on, for me, is that I am using the difference between the Vikes game and the next two games to talk about the entire pocket presence issue. It just finally dawned on me how I really see this issue.

In fact if we weren’t having this discussion, I would just say “yeah Davis is good in the pocket” and leave it at that. But I wondered about the differences between game 1 and games 2/3 and in wondering about it I ended up not accepting the explanation that it’s just a week prepping with the 1s.

So to me, the topic is what “pocket presence” means and how much of that is entirely on the qb. How could Davis be so bad at it in game 1 and not later? It CAN’T be that he just didn’t get reps with the 1s–not if you believe that “pocket presence” is entirely on the qb. Cause, whether or not he was prepared, he could still sense a rush…right? And he could always use his legs and bail…right? I mean if pocket presence is what people say it is, namely all instinct, why didn’t he just bail on plays and run?

Davis himself does not attribute the difference between games 1 and 2/3 WHEN IT COMES TO POCKET PRESENCE to what you guys are citing. He actually said it was being coached to be in rhythm. What he leaves out is that absolutely everything around him was better in game 2. And yeah prepping for a week with a gameplan built around him and his strengths helped too.

Which suggest to me that the pocket presence thing is NOT just raw instinct. Though it’s certainly part that. I think there are a bunch of other factors to it. That’s the only point I am really making.

I can get into a discussion comparing all 3 qbs, but that will just end up with me saying they all have different strengths. Plus, the way I am personally, I have to reserve judgement on Davis till I see him play a real defense…one that has film on him. If in fact he’s the starter by the time the Rams play another top defense (Vikes are 11th).

Well no matter how bad he looked in the Vikes game
that wouldnt prove what you think it would.
Cause all it would prove is that a young kid
got thrown into a game unprepared. To me, thats
all it would prove.

Except I don’t agree with that. If pocket presence is an instinct, why wouldn’t he bail on plays and run around–which you frequently see with young qbs in their first starts.

So I don’t buy this whole “it’s all instinct” thing. Which is one reason why I think that as often as not, these discussions look at the wrong things. I don’t believe it;s just the qb.

To me the most important thing I list is confidence in the offense. When you see a qb has that, he tends to not press and take things as they come.

Though there’s also the fact that under the same conditions Hill did show poise and pocket presence. Which to me just means he could also do it under better conditions.

I promise you that watching, you will ask a lot of the same questions. You cannot predict the game 2 guy out of the game 1 guy. I mean, drastically can’t do it. You will not see any of the instincts you would predict. Not even a desperate, ineffective version of them. He has no sense where the rush is. None.

Your doing it again ZN, minimizing preparation.Davis’ preparation is not him alone of course it’s the syncing up with the whole team.

I am not minimizing that. Just including it among other things.

No one is buying my “pocket presence theory” thing so I will drop that for now.

Let’s just talk about qbs looking good.

Yes prep was part of it. It’s on my list of things that help set up games 2 & 3 just in terms of qb play.

I am going to ask you guys to not minimize THIS stuff. It’s my old list from back in the thread. It’s not in any particular order. Nothing is “prioritized.”

But there’s a lot more to Davis looking good in games 2/3 than just Davis, and just prep time. And of course he himself has a different explanation.

* coaches had not seen him live under real fire before, and they saw flaws they corrected

* AND with that, he had confidence in the offensive players. and acted like it.

(Sidenote: If you want to see what went wrong with Bradford over the years in his worst games, it was precisely that last bit IMO…he pressed when he did not have confidence the offense could execute. What impressed me about Hill is, he hung in there even though he did NOT have that advantage in game 1).

Anyway. I have sort have been in qb discussions for years, and I pretty much always say the same thing. Assuming the qb has talent in the first place, good play or bad play, it’s never just the qb.

My issues with Davis as of right now are twofold. First, we haven’t seen him against a good D that has film on him. 2nd, I don’t know if he can really make all the throws and whether that makes a difference.

GreatRamNTheSky wrote:

Why didn’t people question Andrew Luck when he came into the league right away and was doing what veterans do at QB and winning games? Why is Davis being questioned like this.

Grits

Because Andrew Luck was a highly regarded top player who was pretty much widely acknowledged to be the most pro-ready qb to come out in the draft for years. Plus he actually was a rookie, unlike Davis this year.

Davis was a spread qb, and often high college production from spread qbs does not translate to the pros. Scouting reports kept mentioning his arm. If he had more going for him, then he might have been drafted by somebody in a qb-starved league.

He did have some big fans after the 2012 pre-season, including WV Ram. He was virtually promised the #2 spot in 2013, and actually lost it by his play.

Luck never once looked as bad as Davis did as a 2nd year guy in 2013. Not once. Not in the pre-season, not in games. It was a completely understandable cut.

He was cut and no one picked him up in a qb starved league because he looked that bad. (Well Miami did, for a couple of minutes.) St. Louis only re-signed him in 2013 because he knew the system. They also signed Brady Quinn, but he got injured. He even started out slow last spring. The Rams drafted someone in 2014, clearly with the intent of replacing him.

And then he came through at a high level in 2 games…so far (though he has yet to play a top defense that has film on him, and that’s a big test). He may rise, he may fall. He may be the next Montana, the next Bulger, the next Fitzpatrick, the next Jamie Martin, or the next Matt Flynn, or the next Tyler Thigpen. So that’s my view. I reserve judgement on him until I feel more certain about who he is. That’s fair. and I didn’t believe in Bulger at first either (with Warner, I was convinced by game #2 against Atlanta).

And you are misunderstanding some things people are saying about Davis by the way.

from off the net

===

jrry32

Davis should have to lose the job. And thus far, he’s done nothing but lock it up.

Though there are still issues I see with Davis that defenses might use to adjust and give him issues…but he’s getting closer and closer. He’s really proving me wrong and I couldn’t be more proud.

I think his field vision is limited by his size to an extent which is why we see him do that sort of jump pass when he has to dump it over the OL/DL to a check-down. It’s dangerous if teams start to drop defenders into that zone and fool him into thinking there’s no one there like Dallas did twice. We’ll see if he learns from that mistake and finds a way to fix the issue.

Additionally, his footwork can get sloppy and his pass outside the numbers lack zip which makes ball placement extremely important..(although he’s been stellar at putting the ball where it needs to be on those throws).

Results speak to an entire skill-set…not one isolated attribute. However, that one isolated attribute could prove to be part of the problem if Davis ends up being “figured out” by defenses. Will that happen? I don’t know. Haven’t seen enough yet and that’s something that will likely improve with experience.

The key for him will be working on his core muscles. That’s what Tom Brady did/does. You really want to strengthen your abdomen. That core rotation makes a big difference when it comes to arm strength. Another key will be precision with his feet and driving hard off that back foot on longer throws.

from off the net

===

RamsLife

Crazy thing about Davis for me is this. Back in his rookie yr in ’12, I was really high on him. He looked really good in preseason. Thought he had a chance to develop into a good #2 QB. And for a while thought he could maybe one day become a good starter if he continued to get better and improve his overall game.

But last yr all of that drastically changed. He looked godawful in preseason and wasn’t even able to beat out Clemens to be the #2. I’m not one to dump a player so fast, but I really had no other choice after we cut him. Seemed foolish to believe he could even become a competent backup at that point.

Then came this offseason when we re-signed him. Didn’t think much of it. Thought he would of gotten cut after the preseason. But lo and behold, even though he wasn’t great, he played well and showed flashes of the QB we saw back in ’12. But for some reason, that still didn’t grab my attention nor change my current opinion about him.

Then as we all know, Bradford went down in the 3rd preseason game. Tore his same ACL again. Out for the season. Davis was then a lock to make the team. By then him making the team to me was just by default, despite his good performance in the preseason. Still didn’t change my current opinion about him.

After Hill got hurt against the Vikings, Davis came in and played poorly. That even furthered my disbelief in him. So much so that I thought we were doomed if Davis started against the Bucs, and actually thought Hill gave us a much better shot at winning. But after Davis’s great performance against the Bucs, I had to eat crow on him. At least for that game.

It’s crazy what 1 game can do, but after re-watching that game, I found new hope in Davis and it brought back a lot of those same feelings and thoughts/fanhood of him like it was in ’12. His second consecutive great performance against the Cowgirls last week officially brought me back on his bandwagon.

It’s still crazy to think a 3rd string QB who we cut last season has brought so much hype and people believing he has what it takes to be a starter in this league, but that’s what has happened. And you can count me in as one of those people who believe that, albeit only after 2 games. I believe in him again. I believe he can be a starter in this league. But how good he can be for me at least, remains the question.

Maybe he”ll prove to be a good starter and our long-term answer at QB. Or maybe he devolves over the course of the season and shows he isn’t starter material, but merely a serviceable backup. I obviously hope for the first, but we won’t truly know until he plays more.

this is a good discussion guys. i don’t know if benching davis is the right idea or not. but i do know one thing.

teams have tons of tape on hill. they know his strengths and weaknesses. and he still has a record of playing well.

they have next to nothing on davis. we’ll find out quickly how good davis really is. unless of course hill comes back and davis never sees the field again.

seriously though. he is a very athletic quarterback. or at least he looks more athletic than sam. and his arm is more than adequate. i really would like to see this guy get a real look. he might be the perfect qb for this offense. kinda like a poor man’s russell wilson.

• This reply was modified 10 years, 2 months ago by InvaderRam.

well i would expect hill to be more decisive. he’s a long standing veteran. i think with time davis can become more decisive.

and i do agree that bradford has the better arm. he can throw lasers which davis will probably never be able to do. but his athleticism and his smarts stand out to me. and i’m not sure this offense needs the big armed quarterback. not the way this team is designed.

just one stat i want to throw out because when it comes to everyone else i am very bad at evaluating football. but if i were to look at one STAT that really impressed me in davis’ brief 2 game career, it would be ypa.

davis – again in 2 games – has a ypa of 8.0.

hill – 6.2
bradford – 6.3

again. only 2 games. and sam hasn’t enjoyed a supporting cast this good. but shoot. that’s elite ypa. that’s startling to me.

he seems to make the right decisions to me. he can make plays with his feet. the one thing that i haven’t seen is his ability do it over time. again. coaches will find out his strengths and take them away. try to exploit his weaknesses. i want to see if he can continue to improve and counter the moves that defenses will come up with. and in that respect i can understand why fisher would want to stick with hill. you know what you have in him. there’s a comfort zone there.

but davis has enough tangibles and production to stick with him. mostly because he’s younger with possibly more potential to be tapped.

and i also want to add that this guy is athletic. 4.11 short shuttle and 6.73 3-cone. very athletic. his ability to move around. his vision. his smarts. that appeals to me.

and those hands… haha!

no actually we agree that ypa is not a pure qb stat. i even pointed it out in my post. and it’s something that davis is gonna have to do over more than just 2 games. but if he can keep that up? then that’s something special to me. and yeah. that’s even with acknowledging that there are more factors that go into that than just the qb.