Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 25, 2014 at 11:31 pm in reply to: who should start? will they trade for someone? who? qb discussion #5164
znModeratorI think if you read their tea leaves, they are bringing someone in but on the cheap. Not a trade. As a #2 or #3. This is the time for the pro scouting dept. They are going to be looking for qbs who have been in camp and may be do-able. I don’t know if they trust Austin as a #2. In fact the way Fisher put it, it almost sounds like the Miami game is a try-out for him. I don’t think any team in the league can feel safe waiving a qb for the practice squad.
Here’s what Fisher says about Austin. It’s what led to these thoughts.
These are not put-downs but you don’t see any endorsement of him as the #2:
Again, we’re going to be patient with this. There’s probably a couple quarterbacks let go at 75. There will probably be some let go at the 53 and like I said, there may be somebody, a club, we may have a trade partner out there. We don’t know. but we’re not initiating anything right now.”(On if QB Austin Davis is up to the challenge of being the No. 2 quarterback)
“Yeah, you’re going to see him play. You’re going to get to see him play Thursday night. He played well in the game against a lot of their starters and so he made plays. He’s got a good feel, he’s got a good feel for what we’re doing. As I mentioned, (Offensive Coordinator Brian Schottenheimer’s) ‘Schotty’s’ very much at ease calling plays for him because he understands the offense.”(On Davis’ improvement this offseason)
“Well it’s been hard on him and the others because of what they’re seeing from the defense in camp. That has helped him as you move into the games. (Defensive Coordinator) Gregg’s (Williams) going to throw everything at him and it’s very competitive and it’s difficult. But that makes it easier for him as you get into the regular season. The game slows down when you’re seeing so much happen at practice. It slows down and it’s slowing down for Austin.”August 25, 2014 at 10:54 pm in reply to: for those who are arguing Rams shoulda drafted a qb high #5154znModeratorWell to be fair, TD, I didn’t say anything about Luck today I wasn’t saying before they drafted him (and I was far from alone). I even got in a little trouble saying it among some folks who took it as saying he was better coming out of school than Bradford was (and we WERE saying that).
He was ahead. That was part of his vibe.
The other guys, people talked in terms of physical potential and/or college accomplishments. Luck, the vibe was–just like Donald and his hands techniques–he was very advanced and it was also closely tied to his instincts, anticipation, and timing. Analysts like Cosell were in awe when they talked about Luck.
Well I think I want to clarify this.
I don’t think anyone accurately predicted anything. That is, no one said X will fail, Y will make it.
What I AM saying is that yes Luck was talked about differently. And it showed in who he was too.
With the other guys, as I said, people assessed potential to be a pro qb. They looked at his college play, they looked at his skills, and so on. All of it, from Bradford to Leaf, was about potential.
With Luck, people were talking about how uncannily ahead he was–how he was doing things that 3rd year pros do. Subtle stuff having to do with pre-snap reads, timing, anticipation. He had the instincts of a pro qb already. I think that part of this is he had the aptitude (plus of course ability), but part of it was his coach was Harbaugh and Harbaugh coached him like a pro player.
So yeah Luck was talked about differently.
znModeratorrfl wrote:
They apparently took a major risk playing him before at least 18 months.I am not at all sure about the 18 months. I think that recent rehab techniques have cut that down greatly. There have been a large number of examples beginning with Adrian Peterson who have come back and done well after an ACL injury very quickly. I do not fault the Rams organization for that.
And it is possible that Bradford could rehab his knee again (he will have two months longer to do it) and play for the next five season without missing a down. But will it be with the Rams? We shall see. One thing will be is that the Rams will have until at least January of February to decide what they want to do. His rehab should be well under way by then. They likely will not want to start OTAs with him unless they are confident in him.
==============
There’s a whole ongoing thread about the rehab time fwiw:
http://theramshuddle.com/topic/what-is-the-timeframe-on-acl-recoveries/
===============
zn wrote:
Really, this gets down to different ways we all view it. No one lacks the info. We just regard it in different ways. To me, if Bradford can come back from the 2nd ACL (which remains to be seen), I don’t regard him as a special risk for another, different injury the way I do Amendola.TD wrote:
In six years Bradford has had five major injuries (2 in 2009).
These injuries were to three different places (shoulder, ankle, and knee)For two of these, shoulder and knee, he had reinjuries. The shoulder, first time he came back without surgery. The 2nd re-injure required surgery.
Same general sort of thing with the knee. The knee would not have been under the same kind of stress, I am assuming, if not for the previous injury.
And I really have a hard time counting 2011, when every Rams qb got injured. That year was a major debacle, with an OL that was first dysfunctioning and then injured into a mockery of itself.
So I just don’t see Bradford in the same light I see Amendola (which is what started this sub-thread).
I say that for 2 reasons and it covers 2 things.
First, I see Amendola’s body and the way he plays as not suited to football. I don’t see Bradford that way. I see him right now as basically being hit by a freak thing. I don’t see him as playing, with me thinking “what next.” (And I DID think that with Bradford. Bulger was a walking emergency room.) BUT at the same time, I keep also saying, should they bring him back (and I think they will), he will be on a longer time frame, he probably won’t be the starter (not right away), and they will have to determine how he responds. They have to see if he can play. So I am not discounting a 2nd knee surgery or its possible effects…I just don’t write him off. I really DON’T see it as an Amendola situation where you just move on.
The other thing is that you can afford to walk away from an Amendola. Do you walk away from a qb of this caliber?
So I don’t see the logic of “it’s time to walk away”–what’s more, I aint clairvoyant or nothin but I don’t think the TEAM thinks that either.
And it’s early…but, so far, at this point, the team is not talking like they have to move on. Fisher called the injury a freak thing. They all talk about him being part of the team, and helping with game plans, and so on.
It would be so cold–AND unnecessary–to make him a part of the team, make him part of gameplanning with Hill and a resource for Hill, and then at the end just cut him loose. I can’t imagine any conditions under which that would be possible.
PLUS as I said he is worth the risk, provided of course they also add a qb or 2 and DON’T act as if he is the week 1 starter. If you listen to the team talk about him, they thought he was prepared to take off. So here is a guy with a laser arm, good accuracy, a fine deep ball, who knows the offense, who has everyone’s respect, who knows the receivers, and is basically a 6 year vet in 2015, and they just walk away from that when there is no risk in keeping him to see if he can play?
znModeratorhere’s some more articles. i think the basic gist is they don’t know much. which is often the case in science. they just don’t like to admit it.
and these kinds of injuries are hard to study because there are so few athletes like professional ones who are constantly subjecting their joints to undue stress.
adrian peterson is the exception. not the rule.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130711084135.htm
Well the question is, though, what were people saying about the rehab process, risks, and time to recovery around BRADFORD.
And again I am not the best informed Rams fan out there, but I am pretty decent, and I never once saw anyone offer anything but strong endorsements of the new rehab process.
No one that I ever saw picked up on the more cautious view of it.
And that was whether or not the people talking were associated with the NFL or not.
Now let’s say your one article is the be all and end all. Why weren’t those considerations part of the discussion?
Go back to any and all discussions of OTAs here or elsewhere. Anywhere, really. It was all yeah he’s on schedule yeah he has no effects from the knee etc. No one said “but he’s at risk for another 10 months.” Not fans, not reporters, not the team, not anyone in sports medicine who spoke up within my hearing.
On top of it, the guy I posted today you keep referring to said that recovery works 95% of the time.
I am not sure how AP is an exception if it works 95% of the time.
.
znModeratorand to be completely honest, doctors have an agenda too.
let’s take professional athlete x.
he goes to doctor a who tells him yes i can do the surgery and get you back on the field within a year.
he then goes to doctor b who tells him yes i can do the surgery but it will take two full years before you see any competitive action.
they then see adrian peterson come back in less than a year.
who do you think they’re gonna take their business to?
people rarely take the time to do the real research. most times they probably don’t even want to hear it.
I think there’s something to that, and this all bears discussing.
It could be that the knee industry in sports medicine re-tuned its message after Saturday. Because it was different before Saturday, at least near as I could tell. I am not THE most informed Rams geek in the universe, but I do hear stuff when it’s out there. And before Saturday, the message was different.
BTW the guy who say re-tears happen in year 1 also said this about Bradford:
http://theramshuddle.com/topic/acl-re-tears-are-more-common-in-the-first-year-back-on-bradford/
Given this injury is likely isolated, I believe Bradford still has an excellent chance to return despite the longer odds.
Now remember that’s the same guy who said that a 2nd operation leaves a higher risk of re-injury (though he did not put a number on it…and he said that recovery from a first ACL was the case 95% of the time).
.
znModeratorthen why are re-tears so frequent in the first year?
why?
you really think if the majority of re-tears happen in the first year that the knee has fully healed? it may have been revolutionized, but we know for a fact the nfl brings back players when they’re not completely healthy.
So far, this is all we have. ONE ARTICLE said that, and then didn’t provide any examples. One that came out AFTER Bradford. (And I challenge anyone to find one that says it BEFORE. If that was part of the sports medicine discourse on this, no one from informed fans to local and national reporters knew it before Saturday.)
In fact off the top of your head name a single NFL player who had a re-tear in the last few years.
So right now, as two lay people not medical people chatting about sports, we actually really don’t know to what extent that’s true or not.
August 25, 2014 at 8:36 pm in reply to: for those who are arguing Rams shoulda drafted a qb high #5120znModeratorWell, I think the key for THIS YEAR was that none of the available guys were all that good.
Had there been a real stud in the draft, then given Sam’s injury history it should have been seriously considered. <y sense is that they DID consider it, but never saw a guy worth taking.In response to your long term argument about the relative values of QBs and team building, I think I’ll just say this.
Very few QBs drafted high are worth the hype.
But, occasionally a guy does make a difference and raises a team. Both Luck and RG III did.
And good teams ARE held back by lousy QBing. Hell, our fine 70s and 80s teams were.
So, in the end, I’d say it comes down to genuine quality. A truly special QB is damn rare. Don’t trade away the farm seeking one in bets … but do take one if you get the chance.
yup. but i would add. even if there was a prospect like a flacco or a roethlisberger. even that shoulda been considered. but there wasn’t even that. maybe bortles? i don’t know.
hopefully, in 2015, there will be some prospects in the middle of the first round.
I wouldn’t have considered anyone, invader. And I would not have regarded it as a conscious gamble, either.
In fact as memory serves, none of us did. Or only a few though I don’t even remember that.
.
znModeratorInvaderRam wrote:
i believe the nfl wants us to believe that it has been revolutionized. and it may have.but i have every reason to believe that the nfl brings back players earlier than they really should.
every single article i read has said that the first year back carries a huge risk for a re-tear. why is that? probably because they’re coming back too soon. wait two years. and the probablity goes down. there’s a reason for that.
I didn;t get that from the NFL, invader! Those of us who read up on knee rehab were bringing it in from all kinds of sources.
That is the discourse that was out there, believe me, and the NFL did not control it.
Heck this is the discourse as of just a week ago…from a 101 post:
=====================
injury expert says Jake Long’s return is normal
http://theramshuddle.com/topic/injury-expert-says-jake-longs-return-is-normal/edit/It’s here, at about 7:50 in. ACLs used to take 12-18 months and are now 6-8.
This is completely normal now, and the innovation was rehab. They’ve completely revamped the rehab process. So there is nothing new about this.
Long is ready to go, it’s real.
—
Will Carroll joined Kevin Wheeler to talk about a new break through to prevent arm injuries like Tommy John, biomechanics increasing around MLB, the Cards having yet to adopt biomechanics, recovery from ACL injuries, and shoulder injuries with QB easier than pitchers.
znModeratori believe the nfl wants us to believe that it has been revolutionized. and it may have.
but i have every reason to believe that the nfl brings back players earlier than they really should.
every single article i read has said that the first year back carries a huge risk for a re-tear. why is that? probably because they’re coming back too soon. wait two years. and the probablity goes down. there’s a reason for that.
I didn;t get that from the NFL, invader! Those of us who read up on knee rehab were bringing it in from all kinds of sources.
That is the discourse that was out there, believe me, and the NFL did not control it.
August 25, 2014 at 8:21 pm in reply to: for those who are arguing Rams shoulda drafted a qb high #5112znModerator<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>zn wrote:</div>
No, Luck really was. He was already doing things only more advanced pros do. It was like Donald with hand usage–rookies are not supposed to be advanced as he is. Remember, Luck was not only a good prospect in his own right, he was the son of a former pro qb and had Harbaugh as his college coach.Really good hindsight.
Well to be fair, TD, I didn’t say anything about Luck today I wasn’t saying before they drafted him (and I was far from alone). I even got in a little trouble saying it among some folks who took it as saying he was better coming out of school than Bradford was (and we WERE saying that).
He was ahead. That was part of his vibe.
The other guys, people talked in terms of physical potential and/or college accomplishments. Luck, the vibe was–just like Donald and his hands techniques–he was very advanced and it was also closely tied to his instincts, anticipation, and timing. Analysts like Cosell were in awe when they talked about Luck.
znModeratorbump
znModeratorhe is at a special risk for another though. it’s a fact. a second tear has a worse prognosis. from every single piece of evidence i’ve read. that is the case.
He is at a certain percantage higher risk, yes. But that is not SPECIAL risk. It’s not the same. Not based on what I read.
So this time I assume they take much longer.
And, really, this is a question of what the team will do, not what we want. So far we do not know that.
But right now my guess is, they bring him back in circumstances where he is not the week 1 starter and they take much longer with him to make a more cautious determination.
znModeratorNo, I view it this way. Bradford had a freak moment and a re-tear. I don;t view that as the same.
In 2011 he injured the ankle, but then that year was so rough that every single Rams qb got injured. They picked Clemens up on waivers and he was playing a game 11 days later. And then…got injured. So to me 2011 was the situation.
Amendola has shown that every single year he goes out on the field, it will be something else. That was true of 2011, 2012 (with 2 injuries) and 2013.
In 2009 Bradford injured his shoulder in the first game of the season at Oklahoma. He missed three weeks then came back. He then reinjured his shoulder his second game back ending his season.
In 2011 he was injured much of the season even when he played. And he played only 10 games and was not 100% for many of the rest.
In 2013 he tore his ACL in game #7 ending his season.
In 2014 he re-tore his ACL in the third preseason game ending his season.
In the last six seasons Bradford has finished the season only twice finishing the others on IR (or OU’s equivalent)
Thanks TD, but with all due respect, we all know all that. But some of us are interpreting it differently.
The shoulder came back stronger. The ankle went away, and was a direct result of circumstances where every qb they had got injured that year. The ACL got re-torn, which to me is a freak thing.
I don’t regard that as being like Amendola, who simply cannot play football without injuring something else. Amendola’s body and his style of play combined make him a constant injury risk.
Really, this gets down to different ways we all view it. No one lacks the info. We just regard it in different ways. To me, if Bradford can come back from the 2nd ACL (which remains to be seen), I don’t regard him as a special risk for another, different injury the way I do Amendola.
Besides, in terms of the “move on” thing, it’s one thing to move on from Amendola, who ultimately is much more easily replaced. But the investment in a qb who has those skills AND that level of knowledge of the receivers and the offense is not something to be taken lightly. (In fact my bet is they set it up for him to come back, even with adding another qb through free agency and/or the draft…in fact if they can’t re-sign Hill, maybe both.) He would end up, depending on the circumstances, being a 3rd qb for a while, but if he can go he can go…they’ll determine that.
This is what they are likely to not want to just throw away IF he shows he can still play—>
MICHAEL BROCKERS: he was looking awesome in terms of being so in control of the offense this year. It’s almost like he was a little bit of Tom Brady-ish, checking off routes, knowing what the defense was in and where guys were going to be before they even knew it. He was looking a lot better and smoother this year. We felt like we were going to be so good, and we were going to be contenders
If they can determine that he can go again or not, and do it in such a way that there is no risk, then why not?
And in fact regardless what we think, the TEAM apparently think this is a freak thing. (The re-tear.) Fisher directly said so–his words were something like “a 1 in a 100 thing.”
The worst thing for me would be to walk away from him, have him go through the time he needs, re-emerge with another team, and come back playing well.
And again if they have him in-house next year and figure he CAN’T go, what have they lost?
INVADER: i just see what happened to danario. i don’t want to see the same happen to sam. whether he’s with the rams or not.
Danario had I think FIVE knee operations and a completely reconstructed knee, not an ACL tear followed by a re-tear.
Bradford is to Danario as a housefire is to Hiroshima.
znModeratorRAMS MAKE ROSTER MOVES (Rams email)
ST. LOUIS – The St. Louis Rams waived 10 players Monday, the team announced.
Those waived include CB Jarrid Bryant; P Bobby Cowan; T R.J. Dill; WR Jordan Harris; LS Jorgen Hus; FB Kadeem Jones; LB Johnny Millard; WR T.J. Moe; T D.J. Morrell and LB Pat Schiller. Schiller was waived/injured.
The Rams’ roster now sits at 79 players. They must make four additional moves by 3 p.m. Central time on Tuesday in order to comply with the NFL’s 75-man roster limit.
znModeratorWell, Amendola kept getting different injuries. How does the same injury getting re-injured mean Bradford is Amendola?
B/c he can’t stay on the field AND he HAS injured other things in his career hasn’t he????
No, I view it this way. Bradford had a freak moment and a re-tear. I don;t view that as the same.
In 2011 he injured the ankle, but then that year was so rough that every single Rams qb got injured. They picked Clemens up on waivers and he was playing a game 11 days later. And then…got injured. So to me 2011 was the situation.
Amendola has shown that every single year he goes out on the field, it will be something else. That was true of 2011, 2012 (with 2 injuries) and 2013.
znModeratorRams cut 10 players, none of whom are Michael Sam/PFT
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/25/rams-cut-10-players-none-of-whom-are-michael-sam/
Rams cut 10 players, none of whom are Michael Sam
Posted by Darin Gantt on August 25, 2014, 4:40 PM EDT
St Louis Rams v San Francisco 49ersGetty Images
The Rams made their first wave of moves, with more to come tomorrow.The team announced 10 cuts, none of the surprising variety.
The players released were: Cornerback Jarrid Bryant, punter Bobby Cowan, tackle R.J. Dill, wide receiver Jordan Harris, long snapper Jorgen Hus, fullback Kadeem Jones, linebacker Johnny Millard, wide receiver T.J. Moe, tackle D.J. Morrell and linebacker Pat Schiller (waived/injured).
That gets them to 79, meaning they still have four to cut before tomorrow afternoon.
znModeratorI wonder if they will have any kind of chance to pick high enough for a top one.
But I will watch Hundley this year. Only cause you said to.
znModeratorBut I do not SEE a “run-first” offense emerging on the field.
I think that’s a very interesting thought. Historically btw Hill was pretty good in those medium ranges.
znModeratorI think that was a pretty fair run-down.
I am maybe less worried about the OL because I keep thinking these coaches put less talent out there and come through with it. For example in the oft-mentioned (by me) 2nd half of 2012, SJ was getting 4.3 a carry, Bradford had a 5.4% sack percentage (which is pretty good), and they took it to SF twice and Seattle on the road and came out 1-1-1. That OL was Saffold Turner Wells Wms/Smith Richardson. Since that time 1 of those guys left and got benched (Turner) and another is out of football (Richardson).
So when they have to line the OL up for real and attack around a gameplan, these coaches seem to get the most out of their line.
I also think there’s more to guys like Washington and Bond then maybe you do. I don’t think they look that good all lined up as a unit of 2s, but I do think that 1 of them or another patched in with the 1s can hold up.
August 25, 2014 at 4:15 pm in reply to: for those who are arguing Rams shoulda drafted a qb high #5068znModeratorTrue, Luck is a rare qb.
But pre-draft so was Sam Bradford, RGIII, Tim Crouch, Ryan Leaf, and Jamarcus Russell.No, Luck really was. He was already doing things only more advanced pros do. It was like Donald with hand usage–rookies are not supposed to be advanced as he is. Remember, Luck was not only a good prospect in his own right, he was the son of a former pro qb and had Harbaugh as his college coach.
All the other guys listed were supposed to have potential. That wasn’t Luck. Luck was just something different.
And many of us said in advance that Bradford did not look like an elite class qb. I know some said he was, but many of us never bought in on that. That wasn’t to disparge him. They don’t all have to be elite class qbs.
And as it happens I also think that Bradford paid off as a pro qb and was already quite good. What got Bradford was injuries.
znModeratorI’ll be really curious how these new-rules play out.
I’m wondering if ‘every’ QB in the NFL will
have career years. Maybe the league has made it
easy for ‘ordinary’ quarterbacks to succeed now.
Maybe Shaun Hill will have a 90 rating.
Maybe every ordinary QB will have a 90 rating.Anyway, its gonna be inter esting.
w
vWhat the league has also done, of course, is make the pass rush that much more important.
August 25, 2014 at 11:38 am in reply to: for those who are arguing Rams shoulda drafted a qb high #5041znModeratorSo, in the end, I’d say it comes down to genuine quality. A truly special QB is damn rare. Don’t trade away the farm seeking one in bets … but do take one if you get the chance.
Yes and so rare that to me, it doesn’t even factor into discussion.
There was Luck and before that, Manning, Brady…some say Rodgers and Brees but I always thought they were next level down (which is still a very high level).
I just notice, instead, that you don’t need that. Add a Flacco, Eli, Wilson, Big Ben, and so on to a solid team and that’s just fine.
Heck for example, put Philip Rivers on the Seahawks, and they’re frightening.
Put Rivers on the 2012 Chargers team that had clear problems on offense that needed fixing, and the national consensus is that he’s fading.
It was not hard to spot Luck when he came out. He stood out.
And, Luck is already looking like he is going to be a member of that exclusive club of elite qbs whose careers work this way–they are good enough to drive a passing game that wins for you, until it’s the postseason and then the team crashes and burns. That’s Fouts, Marino, Elway before Davis, Warner in Arz, Manning…among others. Long list.
I would not have taken an elite qb in the 2014 draft. I would have traded the pick and kept deepening the team. If I thought there was a chance Bradford wouldn’t make it, I would grin and bear that and add a good qb later. That really is just the way I see all this. I made the same argument in 2010 when I was against drafting Bradford #1–I thought that it was better to have the team and add the qb.
znModeratorznModeratorNational experts were never excited about the Rams’ playoff prospects this season.
Yeah? Well. Screw em. They didn’t know what we know.
…
znModeratorThe longterm diehard Rams fan.
znModeratorThe ease of Bradford’s re-injury makes you wonder if he came back too soon, doesn’t it? Everybody can’t be Adrian Peterson.
–Mike
Which if true would make the issue the Rams medical staff. That could become an open issue if it ever turns out Saffold’s shoulder really is a problem.
And we’ve paid him money and kept his spot for him
One thing in the middle of this. His contract numbers start to change after this year. Next year he can actually be cut with an 8 M savings. This year if they cut him they get a 7+ M hit.
Personally I think Long was one of the many reasons last year they switched back to a play action attack. On the plus side, if a Long/Wms combo could drive a strong running game, imagine a Long/Robinson combo.
znModeratorMackeyser wrote:
Except for that play where our franchise QB got taken out for the season…
I remember Laram saying Bradford and Jake Long
would have problems after their knee surgeries.Both of em combined on that play
to have ‘problems.’ Ah well.w
vExcept, it wasn’;t inevitable. Adrian Peterson didn;t have problems after his surgery. Brady didn’t have problems after his. And the problems Long had were twofold–one, he had massive rust, and 2, that’s just a rusty version of the guy he was last year already. The knee itself didn;t make him screw up that block. Being Jake Long, then a rusty version of that on top of it, are the twin culprits–the knee really has nothing to do with it (except indirectly, in that he had rust because he was recovering).
znModeratorHe’s the quarterback version of Amendola. You gotta move on….he can’t stay on the field.
Well, Amendola kept getting different injuries. How does the same injury getting re-injured mean Bradford is Amendola?
People are going to be taking different views on this. One view will be, 2 knees means he’s not durable. Another view will be, re-injuring the same knee does not signal that. Unlike Saffold, who injures something different each time, or Amendola, who was reckless with a body that could not handle reckless.
I am of the “wait and find out” school. I honestly do not see the issue with him coming back and finding out if he can play. Though each time I say that, I add they’re going to also get another qb, and it’s responded to with, but they have to get another qb. (?) Of course they’re going to get another qb (though drafting high in round 1 is not the only way to do that.) I think some people around the net think they’re debating against an “attachment to Sam” position. That’s not it. It’s being smart about the qb spot. If Bradford can play after all this is said and done, then, keeping him isn’t sentimental, nor is this “you have to move on” idea all that sound. Why? If it turns out after all is said and done he is competitive as a qb option, why do you have to “move on”? It’s not a break-up, it’s a personnel issue.
I agree with this post, anyway. ===>
=========SunTzu_vs_Camus
I think Bradford is a very good QB that just started to have an offense around him. 2 ACLs back-to-back is a nasty bit of luck. Just so sad.Sam looked great to me and he’ll be completely healthy for OTAs and his ACL will have many more extra months of healing. Either way, the Rams should draft a QB high and have them fight for the starting job.
I just don’t want to watch another Warner situation happen to this team at the most important position…cuz they were not patient. But I understand that it all may just be too much for the organization. We’ll see how they play it.
The Rams will draft a young gun/QB in the 1st or 2nd and let them both duke it out over the Summer…if Sam beats out the young QB and plays great..winner stays and so does the loser cuz the rookie will be cheap for 4 years.
and we’ll have our bases covered. We have 2 good QBs for next year + Shaun Hill.If Sam loses and the kid is a big flash…then maybe we cut Sam….but we CAN afford to keep BOTH Sam and a 1st round pick for 2015. Hedge our bets.
But Sam is a talent…a good man who’s had BAD luck.I do NOT want another situation(like Warner) where we cast Sam aside after a few bad years of injuries….and Sam rises for another team. I think many folks forget how HARD it is to find a good NFL QB…and I think we had one…who was ready to rise this year. Even just drafting ones in the 1st round…it’s still a real challenge to get them ready.
Let’s keep Sam for his last year and draft a kid for cheap. I’ll bet Sam may even renegotiate for cheap too after this season and put much into incentives…or maybe not. LOl
I want Sam…still do especially after watching him throw downfield to WRs that caught the ball. We were ready for a helluva fireworks show this year. It felt like it was all coming together on offense. imo It’s a team game….and Sam is still a part of this team. We can still be successful.
I just really liked Sam finally throwing downfield like a freakin monster…
and Quick & Britt…out fighting the ball for the catch!!! THAT was what we’ve been waiting for…and Sam has finally got some real NFL WRs who fight for the ball judging by last night.Anyway, keep Sam and draft a stud QB in the 1st or 2nd and let them fight it out. We CAN afford both and protect our team. We are building something special here and I think all the players know it. We just a hit little road bump.
znModeratorHi PA. You have a PM.
znModeratorHill SLINGS it. I dunno what people are talking about that he doesn’t have an arm. He may not be able to throw it more than 50, but he routinely zips it in there on 30 yard passes with authoritay!
Well he has kind of a sligthly (just slllyyy-tlee) odd delivery so the velocity and accuracy aren’t tops.
More importantly to me on the plays you refer to, he saw them, and was decisive about hitting them.
-
AuthorPosts
