Hill isn't a drop off versus Bradford IMO

[fancents86]

I like Hill, but i also like to believe we didn't pay 50 mil for a back up qb talent.

 

[LesBaker]

You might think it's semantics, but he was signed as a UDFA in 2002 by the Vikings - 12 years ago.

Yup like I said I didn't know he was riding the pine.

 

[RamFan503]

OK then other than arm strength, accuracy, ability to zip balls by the defender in tight coverage, average of 12 starts per season vs. 2, coming into year three in this system with many of the same receivers, consistently practicing with the starters, and age what advantage did we have with Bradford over Hill?.

There - I fixed it for you.

And I guess I'd have to answer - not a damn thing... well.... maybe a quicker release.

 

[LesBaker]

I like Hill, but i also like to believe we didn't pay 50 mil for a back up qb talent.

Wel

There - I fixed it for you.

And I guess I'd have to answer - not a damn thing... well.... maybe a quicker release.

Unfortunately all that still equaled about the same results.

 

[RamFan503]

Wel


Unfortunately all that still equaled about the same stats.

There. I fixed that one for you too. Yer welcome.

 

[Ram Quixote]

...

I don't agree because if Bradford doesn't have a big year this season is he "long term"? I would say he wouldn't be. Before the knee injury a few days ago, just a few days ago, the jury was still out on Bradford after 4 years, and that's not a good sign for a QB. So there is absolutely no assurance he was the long term answer.

Of all the things that went through my mind when word of his torn ACL arrived, the first thing was that now Bradford couldn't show his detractors that he could live up to his Draft position. Pisses me off that he won't be able to show YOU that he could have been the long term solution. Whether you saw it or not, it's there.

Bradford without 2011 is still a very average QB, he's done exactly nothing noteworthy since being drafted. I'm not beating him up about it, I'm more telling the fans who think the season is lost that the guy who is next man up is as capable as Bradford. And if some posters don't like that I'm fine with it.......but prove me wrong because the facts and history are on my side.

In an earlier post you said Bradford had 3 good games last year. Actually, it was 4: Arizona, Jacksonville, Houston and Carolina. He was 4 yards shy of 300 against AZ, the difference between Cook scoring instead of fumbling. While I'm at it, of the 4 INTs Bradford had last year, only one of them was not of tipped variety.

I DO NOT believe the season is lost. However, I have much more faith in Bradford than you obviously do.

Potential isn't production, and while Bradford has/had more upside than Hill he hasn't shown it or produced like it and that's the truth.

And you lost me here. Statistics are facts, not truth.

 

[LesBaker]

There. I fixed that one for you too. Yer welcome.

Yer a real pill today ya know that.

 

[rams56]

I believe that Sam Bradford was our best option. ... now Hill is our best option.....we WILL win and loose as a TEAM.....as far as other options..... anyone available might be younger not better than Hill......as far as arguing that Bradford would have been better to our chances to win means nothing at this point...... we are so much better as a team then last year..... it would have helped Sam and now it will help Shaun. I believe that Sam was playing much better than even last year...... to the same point..... I believe Shaun is a big upgrade over Clemens. ...I love Sam.... but as a Rams fan..... I love Shaun now too.....we will win ....we will compete for a playoff spot.... whether it's because of or in spite of Shaun Hill.... Next year is next year.... Go Rams....

 

[LesBaker]

...

Of all the things that went through my mind when word of his torn ACL arrived, the first thing was that now Bradford couldn't show his detractors that he could live up to his Draft position. Pisses me off that he won't be able to show YOU that he could have been the long term solution. Whether you saw it or not, it's there.

In an earlier post you said Bradford had 3 good games last year. Actually, it was 4: Arizona, Jacksonville, Houston and Carolina. He was 4 yards shy of 300 against AZ, the difference between Cook scoring instead of fumbling. While I'm at it, of the 4 INTs Bradford had last year, only one of them was not of tipped variety.

I DO NOT believe the season is lost. However, I have much more faith in Bradford than you obviously do.

And you lost me here. Statistics are facts, not truth.

Trust me, I would much prefer Bradford with a perfectly healthy knee and tearing up secondaries for 16 games and the playoffs. But we do not know if he would have, or if he would have been the same up and down QB he has been for these past few years. There is just no way to know.

My point is that if you were thinking this was going to be a good year for the Rams with Bradford then you can expect the same good year with Hill. Of course provided there are issues with him also. But to date these are two guys that are basically interchangeable.

I guess we're going to see what happens soon.......

 

[RamFan503]

Yer a real pill today ya know that.

Today?

 

[Ram Quixote]

Trust me, I would much prefer Bradford with a perfectly healthy knee and tearing up secondaries for 16 games and the playoffs. But we do not know if he would have, or if he would have been the same up and down QB he has been for these past few years. There is just no way to know.

Which is my point. Opinion will rule.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I don't agree because if Bradford doesn't have a big year this season is he "long term"? I would say he wouldn't be. Before the knee injury a few days ago, just a few days ago, the jury was still out on Bradford after 4 years, and that's not a good sign for a QB. So there is absolutely no assurance he was the long term answer.

Bradford without 2011 is still a very average QB, he's done exactly nothing noteworthy since being drafted. I'm not beating him up about it, I'm more telling the fans who think the season is lost that the guy who is next man up is as capable as Bradford. And if some posters don't like that I'm fine with it.......but prove me wrong because the facts and history are on my side.

Potential isn't production, and while Bradford has/had more upside than Hill he hasn't shown it or produced like it and that's the truth.

I respect your opinion Les, and i'm not saying i entirely disagree with you...but i have a question to pose to you:
Do you think hypothetically that Shaun Hill could have put up Bradford's numbers and won 3 games through the first 7 games last season under the same circumstances?
159 for 262
1,687 yards
60.7%
14 TD's
2 INT
2 lost fumbles
90.9 rate

Versus the same opponents:
vs AZ
@ ATL
@ DAL
vs SF
vs JAX
@HOU
@ CAR

With a running game that avg'd 70 yards/game and a bad defense?
---------------------------------------
There is no right or wrong answer, obviously. Just curious of your take.
IMO there's no way we win more than 2 of those games with Shaun Hill. Sam only won 3 but i think if he doesn't go down @ Carolina we win that one.
We don't beat AZ in week one with Shaun Hill.

I'm pretty confident with Hill at QB this year against the Minnesota's, the Washington's and the Oakland's of the league, but against upper echelon defenses is where i think Bradford's abilities and experience vs the division opponents will be missed.

 

[LesBaker]

I respect your opinion Les, and i'm not saying i entirely disagree with you...but i have a question to pose to you:
Do you think hypothetically that Shaun Hill could have put up Bradford's numbers and won 3 games through the first 7 games last season under the same circumstances?
159 for 262
1,687 yards
60.7%
14 TD's
2 INT
2 lost fumbles
90.9 rate

Versus the same opponents:
vs AZ
@ ATL
@ DAL
vs SF
vs JAX
@HOU
@ CAR

With a running game that avg'd 70 yards/game and a bad defense?
---------------------------------------
There is no right or wrong answer, obviously. Just curious of your take.
IMO there's no way we win more than 2 of those games with Shaun Hill. Sam only won 3 but i think if he doesn't go down @ Carolina we win that one.
We don't beat AZ in week one with Shaun Hill.

I'm pretty confident with Hill at QB this year against the Minnesota's, the Washington's and the Oakland's of the league, but against upper echelon defenses is where i think Bradford's abilities and experience vs the division opponents will be missed.

I don't know and my gut tells me Hill doesn't have a lot of those kind of games in him over the course of a season. But he won't need to.

Bradford didn't shine against excellent defenses all the time either, he very much lacked consistency. I know people like to point out the division record but he was his usual hot and cold self in those games too. He played great and not so great. Which is really what we've seen from him his entire career, he hasn't emerged so to speak.

My thing with this topic was just that what we are used to getting from Bradford is what we will pretty much get from Hill.

It's easy to say "look at the 4 game stretch from last year" and extrapolate that into this year........but I can't do that because of the lack of consistency I've witnessed out of Bradford. We've seen him play well for a stretch and said to ourselves "our guy is getting it down now, look the fuck out here we come" and then seen him follow that with really bad play enough times that I can't assume he was going to continue like he was last year. My wish would have been that happening of course.

I'm not a guy who has bashed Bradford, I've always wanted him to kick ass, I think I have been pretty objective about how he has played.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

Can we set up a bet in the betting section?


Will Shaun Hill lead the Rams to have a better winning record than Bradfords best, full seasons. 7-9 (2010), 7-8-1 (2012)?

 

[Rmfnlt]

All I can say is I hope Les is right (no drop off).

If he is, then not much has changed and we are still in target to have a brek out year.

That's something I can get behind... regardless of comparisons to QBs.

 

[Memphis Ram]

yeah but Bradford has been less than accurate for most of his career

Yet new players (Cook, Britt) and NFL evaluators/media say otherwise.

Then again:
Over the years the star studded, experienced WR core the Rams have enjoyed have run every route perfectly, were always where they were supposed to be, never missed a check down, beat coverage consistently, and had hands of glue. Calvin Johnson, Vernon Davis, Michael Crabtree can't even tie the shoes of Brandon Gibson, Chris Givens, Brian Quick, & the 9 of 32 healthy game starts Amendola gave him his last couple of seasons with the team.

Bradford's lack of accuracy is the only reason his completion percentage has been what is is throughout his career. And everyone knows completion percentage is soley on the QB anyway.

There has been no improvement in his game since his rookie season. And you can't count that nice stretch of games last year. Bradford can't improve from year to year. He just got lucky.

 

[LesBaker]

Yet new players (Cook, Britt) and NFL evaluators/media say otherwise.

Then again:
Over the years the star studded, experienced WR core the Rams have enjoyed have run every route perfectly, were always where they were supposed to be, never missed a check down, beat coverage consistently, and had hands of glue. Calvin Johnson, Vernon Davis, Michael Crabtree can't even tie the shoes of Brandon Gibson, Chris Givens, Brian Quick, & the 9 of 32 healthy game starts Amendola gave him his last couple of seasons with the team.

Bradford's lack of accuracy is the only reason his completion percentage has been what is is throughout his career. And everyone knows completion percentage is soley on the QB anyway.

There has been no improvement in his game since his rookie season. And you can't count that nice stretch of games last year. Bradford can't improve from year to year. He just got lucky.

His accuracy has been a subject widely discussed on message boards and by the media. It's easy to place blame on everything but Bradford I guess.

His accuracy HAS been an issue. Britt said he was the most accurate QB "he" played with. Look at the guys he has played with......JLocker, VYoung and an aging KCollins. Not much to brag about there.

Anyway I'm done with this topic.......it's no longer a fun and interesting discussion and I've grown bored with it.

 

[Ramatik]

No worries.....

I didn't know he rode the pine for a few years so you're right about that.

I'm right about everything else though.

So he rode the pine for 4 years.

Before he got into a game.

And took 7 years to put up the same numbers that Bradford has.

I'm sorry, but it is a pretty big drop off.

But I'm hoping the team can step it up even more. That guys develop into the Probowlers we were hoping for. And we can actually pull out 10 games.

Of course, at this point, I'd be fairly happy at .500.

Man this sucks.

 

[Ramatik]

His accuracy has been a subject widely discussed on message boards and by the media. It's easy to place blame on everything but Bradford I guess.

His accuracy HAS been an issue. Britt said he was the most accurate QB "he" played with. Look at the guys he has played with......JLocker, VYoung and an aging KCollins. Not much to brag about there.

Anyway I'm done with this topic.......it's no longer a fun and interesting discussion and I've grown bored with it.

Discussed on message boards means absolutely nothing.

Except stupid people are communicating.

 

[Lesson]

Hill won ROTY where you sit? Its unfair to compare the two because

1. Bradford has never been in a regular season game with as much talent as Hill had in SF and DET. That is sad to say but true.
2. Now in 2014 when Bradford would have had NFL level talent around him, Hill is going to get to play with his toys. All Hill has to do is not cause turnovers and he will be favorably compared to Bradfords career.

That said, I share your faith in Hill. A veteran presence may actually be what the doctor ordered. Who knows. I just hope we don't give up the farm for a high desperation draft pick next year.

The teams Hill played on in SF and DET didn't have much talent when he played either. While I disagree that he's the same as Bradford, I think he's more similar to him than Clemens.