Thanks. Looks good.

I was going to post a question–which positions should factor high in the next draft? And then when I started to write about it (that’s all deleted now), I realized–I don’t know how it’s possible to answer that yet.

Are they good at CB? Or will the current ones step up?

Safety? Same.

Scheme of course applies to the whole secondary. It’s not just stepping up, will the scheme set these particular guys up to come through?

DL, you would imagine, would only be depth.

Are they set at tackle, or will Long regress or just not come through?

Are they set at the interior line? Who is behind Wells and Robinson that’s real?

I say yes they should add a receiver cause my view is, you always add a receiver, until you don’t need to.

RB? The way these guys are they will always need another RB, IMO.

QB? Maybe, if he (in my view) regresses, or (according to other views) fails to step up.

Will a couple of new high draft picks (rounds 1 and 2)…put them over the top? JUst be crucial depth? Fill in holes and weaknesses?

Others might be able to say but I personally am just left with a big dose of “wait n see.”

..

…

WV, if you break all those pick 6’s down, you don’t get 6 cases of an unnerved qb throwing blind into coverage.

Think of Stacy letting Mikkel hit his arm in the Carolina game…or, think of the one that bounced right off Richardson’s hands to a DE who had dropped into coverage (I think that was the Dallas game).

And I can pull of vids of him rolling out of the pocket and hitting a couple of TDs on the run. I could also repost the 30+ yarder to Cook where he waits knowing that a free lineman bears down on him. Those are just a couple of the off the top of my head examples.

And what about the 11/11 game in SF in 2012 where he went 26 of 39 (66.67%) for 275 yards, a 7.05 YPA, 2 TDs, and earned a 104.1 qb rating? That was against the NFC champs on their home turf…and that’s without the 80 yarder to Amendola early in OT that was called back because of penalty.

I have just seen too much that contradicts that view. Even erring on the conservative side, I would say it’s far more mixed than that, and not that cut n dried.

..

I see Luck as a top-five real-life signal caller, even if his fantasy performance hasn’t quite reached those heights. (Yet.)

Kaepernick is criticized for making only one or two reads before running, which makes sense when you consider his third read has been a fullback or Jon Baldwin.

Below, different view on the same qbs. IE. just interesting qb discussion.

=====

jrry32

Luck is a solid to good QB. I think he’s overrated because many people treat him like he’s one of the best QBs in the NFL. Overrated to me has more to do with how you’re treated relative to your talent level than your talent level by itself.

Luck is treated like he’s an elite QB when the reality is that he’s been a solid to good QB thus far in his career that has benefited greatly from playing in the worst division in football. Last year, Sam Bradford had a 121.6 QB Rating against the AFC South and averaged 3 TDs per game. You don’t think he’d have benefited greatly from playing 6 games a year against Jacksonville, Tennessee, and Houston instead of San Francisco, Arizona, and Seattle?

Newton is currently the better QB. Luck is a better pocket passer but it’s not by much of a margin. As far as pressure is concerned, according to PFF’s Pressure%, Newton was the 11th most pressured QB in the NFL and Andrew Luck was the 10th most pressured QB in the NFL. The difference in pressure faced between the two was negligible. What was not negligible was Newton’s 66.4% accuracy% while under pressure compared to Andrew Luck’s 56.0%. That’s a difference of over 10%.

Kaepernick is a limited QB that is overly reliant on his athleticism. He isn’t a mentally adept QB. He has a strong arm and great athleticism which allow him to compensate for how slowly he processes things, his poor field vision, and his struggles makings his way through progressions. Kaepernick is lucky to play on an offense with a stellar supporting cast and stellar coaching. Because he’d be a mediocre or worse QB in most other places.

Wilson is flawed. But he’s a cerebral, accurate, patient QB that would play solid football for the Rams. Wouldn’t have the numbers he did in Seattle but he’d be good for us.

,

Maddy wrote:

As long as I stay on their good side, I think QB, RB, and even the OL will be definite strengths.

Maybe we should collect a big donut fund for you. Football gods like donuts, right?

Hey have another chocolate glazed! Say…don’t you think the Rams offensive line has been injured enough over the years?

.

wv wrote:

===========================
Laram

there is an element of that, and is quite prevalent.

There have been many times when Bradford instead of staying upright and keeping his eyes downfield, will just fold in the pocket.

Another thing he will do is quickly check it down with perceived pressure.

That extra second or two in the pocket was a prominent attribute that made Kurt Warner great.

People talk about his o-line but Kurt took a number of hits for the team…standing in the pocket.

Sam does not handle pressure well at all. Not at all.
=================================

???

Since the OL played more or less healthy…going back to the 1st SF game, 2012…Bradford has been sacked 27 times in 15 games. That’s less than 2 a game, which is a good rate. So is that strictly speaking “prevalent”? So if he never did this thing he presumably did a couple of times, the duck and cover thing, he would…what? Be sacked once a game? Which would be better than anyone.

The span I am talking about includes 644 attempts. 27 sacks is a 4.8% sack rate (rounded up). A 4.8% sack rate against 2013 numbers would be 5th best in the league. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2013/passing.htm

(I edited this cause I had a math error…he would have been 5th best not 3rd best, which is what I originally said).

So there’s this “bad thing” which presumably happened part of the 27 times he was sacked in his 684 attempts across the span I am talking about, it just looms as a big, indicative huge thing? As opposed to being integrated and balanced out as just one more thing among others? If it even happened more than a couple of times and wasn’t just being coached to take sacks rather than fumble? Or any of that?

We also have vids of him taking hits just after throwing, like the one I put up the other day of the 30-something yard throw to Cook in Houston. Where he knew he was going to be hit and made the throw.

…

• This reply was modified 9 years, 9 months ago by zn.

Farr on the Wms defense: “it’s a safety-making defense.” Safeties are set up to do well in this D.

.

RockRam

Bradford is not soft physically or mentally.
However he doesn’t exhibit an ability to improvise much.

I think Bradford’s demeanor is not to take many risks, and to operate squarely in the middle of the system.
When the play breaks down, he doesn’t exhibit much ability to make lemonade from lemons.

That said, that doesn’t mean that he is soft or incapable of taking the Rams to the Superbowl.
It means that the system MUST revolve around what he does best, and avoid what he can’t do.

He needs a pretty clean pocket, because he is a pocket QB.
He needs WRs to get open, because his conservative nature doesn’t allow him to throw it up for grabs (although, if he had a guy who won most 50/50 balls he might).
He needs a strong running game, and an oline that can keep his feet clean.
He needs to be able to step UP into the pocket.
He needs to only have to throw on average 20 times per game.
He needs a play action pass scheme.
He needs very good WRs who can get open and hang onto the ball; if he only has 1 who is reliable, that’s who he’ll look for first every time (Danny Amendola and before him Clayton).

He CAN roll out, either way, but because he’s conservative whenever he rolls out he’ll only throw to that side of the field and not across his body to the opposite side.
He CAN audible the Rams out of bad plays.
He CAN move the ball down the field fast in a fast pace, when asked to.
He CAN make accurate throws at every distance.
He CAN make every throw because he has the arm strength.
He CAN read defenses.
He CAN translate an offensive game plan to the field.
He CAN have patience and not get flustered.
He CAN get rid the ball quickly (fast release).

He can NOT win a game with his feet.
He can NOT improvise.
He can NOT throw a guy open.
He can NOT move around in the pocket very well or buy time.
He can NOT be a fiery vocal leader.
He can NOT carry himself with a swagger and challenge his opponent that way.
He can NOT throw 35 times per game, in a past first offense, and survive let alone win consistently.
He can NOT elevate the team by himself ala Rogers, Brady, P. Manning.
He can NOT be a gunslinger who can throw 4 or 5 INTs ala Favre, and maintain a “what the hell” persona and a true personal confidence.

This is who Sam is, what he needs, and what he can and cannot do.

If Schotty will design an offense for this, and he has the players to support him, he can lead us to the playoffs.

wv wrote:

So we have a former player saying Bradford is “soft”
and a former NFL QB saying Bradford lacks ‘courage’.

w
v

Here’s my response. Would anyone think either thing if they had not heard those words from 2 guys?

In this vid, watch Bradford on the throw to Cook starting at 5:55 in. That’s against Houston, which ended the season as a top 7 defense and before the Rams game was ranked 2nd.

zn wrote:

Running backs coach Ben Sirmans told the Post-Dispatch, “Sometimes you wish you would’ve figured out what you had a little earlier. Based off Zac’s success at Vanderbilt in the top conference in college football, we knew he had talent. But he was a little banged up in camp, and we had Daryl and Isaiah getting the bulk of the reps. They were the guys we’d seen, guys who had actually played in the NFL.

In response to the above:

laram

Torry Holt said that is exactly what Fisher told him as well

wv wrote:

======================
So, why did it take as long as it did for him to get his opportunity? Running backs coach Ben Sirmans told the Post-Dispatch, “Sometimes you wish you would’ve figured out what you had a little earlier. Based off Zac’s success at Vanderbilt in the top conference in college football, we knew he had talent. But he was a little banged up in camp, and we had Daryl and Isaiah getting the bulk of the reps. They were the guys we’d seen, guys who had actually played in the NFL.
“It can be really difficult to get a true indication of what you have in a player until you see him in live situations.”
====================

Makes sense. Lotta things happened. Richardson hurt the toe in game one. SF and Dallas defenses
played really well. Neither Pead or Bennie C really stepped up. I think Bennie was hurt too, maybe.
And then Stacy gets to start against the Worst (by far) team in the NFL at that time.

I think Stacey is a topnotch back when he’s healthy. Very impressed with him.

w
v

Plus this is about the time Pead got doghoused, apparently or reportedly.

..