Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Rams Huddle › I think Davis solidfied his hold on the number one job today.
- This topic has 18 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 1 month ago by
GreatRamNTheSky.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 21, 2014 at 5:04 pm #8084
GreatRamNTheSkyParticipantDavis did everything you needed to win the game. The defense lost the game for the Ram simples as that.
If you don’t believe Davis is for real after this game then I don’t know what would convince you.
Grits
September 21, 2014 at 5:13 pm #8086GreatRamNTheSkyParticipantGame ball: QB Austin Davis. Fisher can insist all he wants that the job belongs to Shaun Hill when he returns from a thigh injury but Davis has done enough in his two starts to give Fisher something to think about over the bye. The fourth-quarter pick-six he threw was brutal and his second was simply him trying to make a play but he was excellent otherwise, finishing 30-of-42 for 327 yards with three touchdowns for a passer rating of 98.0.
Nick Wagoner
I agree with Nick.
Grits
September 21, 2014 at 5:15 pm #8087
PA RamParticipantIn all fairness to Hill–no one has seen a lot of him. I don’t know that he couldn’t do just as well–or better. I haven’t seen enough of him.
Having said that, I would not be bothered if Davis was the starter going forward. Young guy–probably going to get even better. Like you said, he is not responsible for this loss.
And if the defense continues to play this way–the QB(whoever it is) won’t be responsible for the next one. The Rams have a major problem right now. QB ain’t it.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick
September 21, 2014 at 5:29 pm #8089
znModeratorHe managed the game well for most of 4 quarters. Made some nice plays. He was one of the reasons they were ahead.
He’s not the reason they got behind.
But.
If there’s one thing I put HEAVILY on the qb, it’s performance in crunch time, at the end of games when they are down but can win.
Under those conditions he threw 2 INTs.
That either means he doesn’t have it, or is still raw and young and making crucial mistakes.
To let him off the hook for that is not being objective, IMO.
What I am most interested in, though, in these discussions is a genuinely open and objective comparison of the 2 qbs–that is, THEIR PLAY. Not their bios, or how they are on the sideline, and so on. Their PLAY. If someone can’t do that it’s only because they have not seen enough of both players to actually compare them.
I have nothing against Davis and am happy to be objective about both qbs.
However, I think what actually happened is–Davis did nothing to take the #1 spot away from Hill.
If Hill can’t come through then it’s back to Davis.
September 21, 2014 at 6:05 pm #8098GreatRamNTheSkyParticipantHe managed the game well for most of 4 quarters. Made some nice plays. He was one of the reasons they were ahead.
He’s not the reason they got behind.
But.
If there’s one thing I put HEAVILY on the qb, it’s performance in crunch time, at the end of games when they are down but can win.
Under those conditions he threw 2 INTs.
That either means he doesn’t have it, or is still raw and young and making crucial mistakes.
To let him off the hook for that is not being objective, IMO.
What I am most interested in, though, in these discussions is a genuinely open and objective comparison of the 2 qbs–that is, THEIR PLAY. Not their bios, or how they are on the sideline, and so on. Their PLAY. If someone can’t do that it’s only because they have not seen enough of both players to actually compare them.
I have nothing against Davis and am happy to be objective about both qbs.
However, I think what actually happened is–Davis did nothing to take the #1 spot away from Hill.
If Hill can’t come through then it’s back to Davis.
I’m sorry but you are being biased when you say he did nothing to take the job away from Hill.
He did plenty.
Man you are blind.
Grits
September 21, 2014 at 6:32 pm #8099
Eternal RamnationParticipantHe managed the game well for most of 4 quarters. Made some nice plays. He was one of the reasons they were ahead.
He’s not the reason they got behind.
But.
If there’s one thing I put HEAVILY on the qb, it’s performance in crunch time, at the end of games when they are down but can win.
Under those conditions he threw 2 INTs.
That either means he doesn’t have it, or is still raw and young and making crucial mistakes.
To let him off the hook for that is not being objective, IMO.
What I am most interested in, though, in these discussions is a genuinely open and objective comparison of the 2 qbs–that is, THEIR PLAY. Not their bios, or how they are on the sideline, and so on. Their PLAY. If someone can’t do that it’s only because they have not seen enough of both players to actually compare them.
I have nothing against Davis and am happy to be objective about both qbs.
However, I think what actually happened is–Davis did nothing to take the #1 spot away from Hill.
If Hill can’t come through then it’s back to Davis.
Wasn’t Hill’s last throw a clutch situation ?
September 21, 2014 at 6:48 pm #8102znModeratorzn wrote:
He managed the game well for most of 4 quarters. Made some nice plays. He was one of the reasons they were ahead.He’s not the reason they got behind.
But.
If there’s one thing I put HEAVILY on the qb, it’s performance in crunch time, at the end of games when they are down but can win.
Under those conditions he threw 2 INTs.
That either means he doesn’t have it, or is still raw and young and making crucial mistakes.
To let him off the hook for that is not being objective, IMO.
What I am most interested in, though, in these discussions is a genuinely open and objective comparison of the 2 qbs–that is, THEIR PLAY. Not their bios, or how they are on the sideline, and so on. Their PLAY. If someone can’t do that it’s only because they have not seen enough of both players to actually compare them.
I have nothing against Davis and am happy to be objective about both qbs.
However, I think what actually happened is–Davis did nothing to take the #1 spot away from Hill.
If Hill can’t come through then it’s back to Davis.
Wasn’t Hill’s last throw a clutch situation ?
Hill was injured, ER. Tried to throw it out of bounds but because of the quad, didn’t have the heft to do it.
And no, I was specifically talking about end of the game comebacks. Not “clutch situations” in general. Heck before the 2010 draft, I went back to check the boxscores on all of Bradford’s games where they were in 4th quarter comeback situations. That was part of what I talked about with him, back then. This has always been important to me. It’s the time in a game when the most is put on a qb’s passing.
September 21, 2014 at 8:26 pm #8113GreatRamNTheSkyParticipantI think we saw plenty of clutch from this kid (Davis) the last two weeks. He could not have been more clutch. That horrible fucking defense we saw today on the part of the players and Greg Williams is what put him into that situation that created those two interceptions. The second INT he simply over threw the receiver trying to make a play. This kid went 30 of 42 for 323 yards and two scores. We have not seen those kind of numbers very often in the Bradford era. This offense with Davis at QB put nearly 30 points on Dallas and these were not cheap points. That drive at the start of the game. That was a nine minute thing of beauty that the Rams have not seen their offense produce in I could not tell you how long.
Davis the QB, case closed.
Grits
-
This reply was modified 10 years, 1 month ago by GreatRamNTheSky.
September 21, 2014 at 8:34 pm #8116znModeratorI think we saw plenty of clutch from this kid
I wasn’t talking about “clutch” in general. I was talking about 4th quarter comebacks when behind with a win possible–in my own words, I was talking about “the end of games when they are down but can win.”
I just prefer being objective about this, and objectively, he did not come through. To me that’s a criticism. I don’t see the point in skimping out on legit criticism.
But it doesn’t matter either way. I didn’t say I would make the #1 or NOT make him the #1 based on the Dallas game…the Dallas game was always going to have no effect either way on my view of who the #1 qb is.
I am glad they are going with the vet, and I am glad the kid performed well enough for some to question that. Nice problem to have. If they vet can’t do it, they can always go back to the kid.
That’s always going to be my view, Grits though I am probably not going to keep repeating it. We just see this one differently.
September 21, 2014 at 8:35 pm #8117Eternal RamnationParticipantEternal Ramnation wrote:
zn wrote:
He managed the game well for most of 4 quarters. Made some nice plays. He was one of the reasons they were ahead.He’s not the reason they got behind.
But.
If there’s one thing I put HEAVILY on the qb, it’s performance in crunch time, at the end of games when they are down but can win.
Under those conditions he threw 2 INTs.
That either means he doesn’t have it, or is still raw and young and making crucial mistakes.
To let him off the hook for that is not being objective, IMO.
What I am most interested in, though, in these discussions is a genuinely open and objective comparison of the 2 qbs–that is, THEIR PLAY. Not their bios, or how they are on the sideline, and so on. Their PLAY. If someone can’t do that it’s only because they have not seen enough of both players to actually compare them.
I have nothing against Davis and am happy to be objective about both qbs.
However, I think what actually happened is–Davis did nothing to take the #1 spot away from Hill.
If Hill can’t come through then it’s back to Davis.
Wasn’t Hill’s last throw a clutch situation ?
Hill was injured, ER. Tried to throw it out of bounds but because of the quad, didn’t have the heft to do it.
And no, I was specifically talking about end of the game comebacks. Not “clutch situations” in general. Heck before the 2010 draft, I went back to check the boxscores on all of Bradford’s games where they were in 4th quarter comeback situations. That was part of what I talked about with him, back then. This has always been important to me. It’s the time in a game when the most is put on a qb’s passing.
I think Bradford is at his best in the comeback situations so was Bulger but I don’t remember Warner ever making a successful comeback. A number of times Warner did take back the lead and his D didn’t hold so he didn’t get the W.Does the throw to Pettis against the Bucs that set up the game winning FG meets your criteria?
September 21, 2014 at 8:43 pm #8120znModeratorzn wrote:
Eternal Ramnation wrote:
zn wrote:
He managed the game well for most of 4 quarters. Made some nice plays. He was one of the reasons they were ahead.He’s not the reason they got behind.
But.
If there’s one thing I put HEAVILY on the qb, it’s performance in crunch time, at the end of games when they are down but can win.
Under those conditions he threw 2 INTs.
That either means he doesn’t have it, or is still raw and young and making crucial mistakes.
To let him off the hook for that is not being objective, IMO.
What I am most interested in, though, in these discussions is a genuinely open and objective comparison of the 2 qbs–that is, THEIR PLAY. Not their bios, or how they are on the sideline, and so on. Their PLAY. If someone can’t do that it’s only because they have not seen enough of both players to actually compare them.
I have nothing against Davis and am happy to be objective about both qbs.
However, I think what actually happened is–Davis did nothing to take the #1 spot away from Hill.
If Hill can’t come through then it’s back to Davis.
Wasn’t Hill’s last throw a clutch situation ?
Hill was injured, ER. Tried to throw it out of bounds but because of the quad, didn’t have the heft to do it.
And no, I was specifically talking about end of the game comebacks. Not “clutch situations” in general. Heck before the 2010 draft, I went back to check the boxscores on all of Bradford’s games where they were in 4th quarter comeback situations. That was part of what I talked about with him, back then. This has always been important to me. It’s the time in a game when the most is put on a qb’s passing.
I think Bradford is at his best in the comeback situations so was Bulger but I don’t remember Warner ever making a successful comeback. A number of times Warner did take back the lead and his D didn’t hold so he didn’t get the W.Does the throw to Pettis against the Bucs that set up the game winning FG meets your criteria?
You;re right…Bulger and Bradford were both better at comebacks than Warner. And it wasn’t just the times the D didn’t hold up.But Warner had plenty going for him, more than enough to compensate for that.
Yes the Bux game counts but then that’s 1-1 in comeback situations. And in those situations, in the Dallas game, he is the one who made the critical errors. It’s not just that they didn’t get the win…he was the one who threw the INTs.
The point of my comment initially was, he deserves criticism for some things. We all saw what he did well. But he still deserves criticims for some things..like throwing 2 INTs in the final 5 minutes. It seems to me that we’re not being reasonably objective unless we count that in the tally. Seems a bit of a blindspot to not mention it. I like to keep an even keel talking about qbs, myself. So for example in 2007 when the OL was a complete shambles yet many were blaming Bulger for everything, I would point out that no qb can play well if his OL were THAT messed up. Similarly, on the other side, I thought Davis did well today…he was certainly not the reason they got behind. But, he threw 2 INTs in the final five minutes when they had a chance to regain the lead.
If you went around the net after a game where either Bulger or Bradford (or even at some points Warner) threw 2 INTs in those circumstances, do you think people would overlook it?
September 21, 2014 at 9:16 pm #8132
InvaderRamModeratoraustin davis impressed the crap out of me today. i’d have a hard time sending him back to the bench when he’s playing this well. he’s earning that starting job right now.
receivers have been impressive so far. when they can find a spot for bailey and austin, even better. although i’m wondering how they could possibly fit them in with all those guys playing so well.
September 21, 2014 at 9:19 pm #8134InvaderRamModeratorone thing i gotta add though is that davis has had a strong running game both times he started. i wanna see how he does when he doesn’t have that running game to support him. that’ll be key to how good he could possibly become.
September 21, 2014 at 10:35 pm #8150
ZooeyModeratorI will say one thing about Davis. He seems to go through progressions better than Bradford does.
September 21, 2014 at 10:37 pm #8151znModeratorI will say one thing about Davis. He seems to go through progressions better than Bradford does.
Oh I don’t believe that for a second. Bradford went through progressions, and if anything, they have scaled back the number of options Davis has per pass play. What Davis has that Bradford didn’t is the 2014 Rams receiving corps…which is just better.
September 21, 2014 at 11:38 pm #8158Eternal RamnationParticipant<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Eternal Ramnation wrote:</div>
zn wrote:
Eternal Ramnation wrote:
zn wrote:
He managed the game well for most of 4 quarters. Made some nice plays. He was one of the reasons they were ahead.He’s not the reason they got behind.
But.
If there’s one thing I put HEAVILY on the qb, it’s performance in crunch time, at the end of games when they are down but can win.
Under those conditions he threw 2 INTs.
That either means he doesn’t have it, or is still raw and young and making crucial mistakes.
To let him off the hook for that is not being objective, IMO.
What I am most interested in, though, in these discussions is a genuinely open and objective comparison of the 2 qbs–that is, THEIR PLAY. Not their bios, or how they are on the sideline, and so on. Their PLAY. If someone can’t do that it’s only because they have not seen enough of both players to actually compare them.
I have nothing against Davis and am happy to be objective about both qbs.
However, I think what actually happened is–Davis did nothing to take the #1 spot away from Hill.
If Hill can’t come through then it’s back to Davis.
Wasn’t Hill’s last throw a clutch situation ?
Hill was injured, ER. Tried to throw it out of bounds but because of the quad, didn’t have the heft to do it.
And no, I was specifically talking about end of the game comebacks. Not “clutch situations” in general. Heck before the 2010 draft, I went back to check the boxscores on all of Bradford’s games where they were in 4th quarter comeback situations. That was part of what I talked about with him, back then. This has always been important to me. It’s the time in a game when the most is put on a qb’s passing.
I think Bradford is at his best in the comeback situations so was Bulger but I don’t remember Warner ever making a successful comeback. A number of times Warner did take back the lead and his D didn’t hold so he didn’t get the W.Does the throw to Pettis against the Bucs that set up the game winning FG meets your criteria?
You;re right…Bulger and Bradford were both better at comebacks than Warner. And it wasn’t just the times the D didn’t hold up.But Warner had plenty going for him, more than enough to compensate for that.
Yes the Bux game counts but then that’s 1-1 in comeback situations. And in those situations, in the Dallas game, he is the one who made the critical errors. It’s not just that they didn’t get the win…he was the one who threw the INTs.
The point of my comment initially was, he deserves criticism for some things. We all saw what he did well. But he still deserves criticims for some things..like throwing 2 INTs in the final 5 minutes. It seems to me that we’re not being reasonably objective unless we count that in the tally. Seems a bit of a blindspot to not mention it. I like to keep an even keel talking about qbs, myself. So for example in 2007 when the OL was a complete shambles yet many were blaming Bulger for everything, I would point out that no qb can play well if his OL were THAT messed up. Similarly, on the other side, I thought Davis did well today…he was certainly not the reason they got behind. But, he threw 2 INTs in the final five minutes when they had a chance to regain the lead.
If you went around the net after a game where either Bulger or Bradford (or even at some points Warner) threw 2 INTs in those circumstances, do you think people would overlook it?
Nope it would be and should be part of the equation but Hill’s part in the INT shouldn’t be overlooked either.If he was
injured on that play I have to weigh the possibility Davis’ superior mobility prevents him getting injured there. If Hill was
injured before that play not coming out of the game was a poor decision that needs to be added to his side of the equation.
Hill’s 0 for 0 in comebacks is not an advantage it’s a liability . Davis has improved so fast taking the starters reps putting Hill back at the starting position will slow that way down .I don’t see Hill getting any better at this point, his skills are in decline. I just don’t think it’s a good decision but I do think it is what Fisher doesSeptember 21, 2014 at 11:48 pm #8160ZooeyModeratorZooey wrote:
I will say one thing about Davis. He seems to go through progressions better than Bradford does.Oh I don’t believe that for a second. Bradford went through progressions, and if anything, they have scaled back the number of options Davis has per pass play. What Davis has that Bradford didn’t is the 2014 Rams receiving corps…which is just better.
All I know is I see Davis drop back and look at two or three guys before he throws quite often, and I don’t see Bradford doing it as frequently.
September 22, 2014 at 12:07 am #8161znModeratorzn wrote:
Zooey wrote:
I will say one thing about Davis. He seems to go through progressions better than Bradford does.Oh I don’t believe that for a second. Bradford went through progressions, and if anything, they have scaled back the number of options Davis has per pass play. What Davis has that Bradford didn’t is the 2014 Rams receiving corps…which is just better.
All I know is I see Davis drop back and look at two or three guys before he throws quite often, and I don’t see Bradford doing it as frequently.
Naw, we definitely don’t agree.
You know what that means, right?
Yep.
Board war.
September 22, 2014 at 1:32 am #8185GreatRamNTheSkyParticipantGuys I think ZN is playing the role he usually plays here. His view point is always opposite of whatever mine is.
Sorry ZN but you’re wrong in this case and I don’t need your confirmation to affirm that I am right. I know that I am.
Grits
-
This reply was modified 10 years, 1 month ago by
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
