Dig deep. It's introspection time.

[-X-]

STOP.

Introspection time.

Eh. Some of you will get the reference. Seriously though, I want to ask a question (or two) that requires people to really look within themselves to come up with an answer. And it's gonna be difficult to do, I think. Because quite honestly, I don't even know the answer when I ask it of myself.

So ... the question is this. What makes you, as a fan of the Rams, want to defend a specific player (to the death) against other fans of the Rams who feel it incumbent upon them to criticize that same player? And CONVERSELY, what makes you, as a fan of the Rams, want to criticize one player of the team, while being offended by the criticism of the one you like to defend? I've seen Gibson derided by people who get offended by Bradford criticisms, and I've seen Bradford derided by people who get offended by Gibson criticism.

Is it the WAY people criticize that makes you take offense and become deeply ingrained in your position?

Is it that you feel people just don't see what you see?

Is it because the guy you defend is a really good guy (in general)?

Is it because some people refuse to validate a different opinion?

Just curious. I'll probably think about it some more and come up with my own reasons later, but for now I'm curious about this net-wide phenomenon that turns boards into shit houses. And, in case you weren't already aware, this board is not one that tolerates arguments going beyond the subject matter and into personal attacks. An easy way to know when you're about to violate TOS around here is when you have to use the word "you" (or any variation thereof) in a debate. That's when you're making a point about the poster, and not the post.

 

[Faceplant]

Please Hammah don't hurt em'. I'm on my phone so I won't be able to write a novella, but I personally do not get attached enough to any player to defend or criticize too much. I am about team. If Dieter flippin Brock rose from the ashes and came back to lead this team to a Superbowl at the age of 70, I would buy a #5 jersey. Just win baby....PLEASE!!!!!!! I have added absolutely nothing to this thread X, and for that I am sorry.

 

[-X-]

Please Hammah don't hurt em'. I'm on my phone so I won't be able to write a novella, but I personally do not get attached enough to any player to defend or criticize too much. I am about team. If Dieter flippin Brock rose from the ashes and came back to lead this team to a Superbowl at the age of 70, I would buy a #5 jersey. Just win baby....PLEASE!!!!!!! I have added absolutely nothing to this thread X, and for that I am sorry.

Sure you did. That's a valid view too.

But ... let me ask. Do you have a particular guy on this current squad that you really enjoy watching?

 

[Angry Ram]

Re Bradford, b/c ppl act like he's the sole problem of the team. I always read "he has to do more" but no one ever explains what "more" is. Bring up QB rating, the most useless and skewed stat in sports.

Every fuckin loss is his fault. They act like they can see what Sam sees, know everything, and pretends to be a coach. How can one "know" he doesn't have "pocket awareness" or my favorite "lacks the football smarts." Like WTF does that even mean?

They pretend that the few seconds they see on the sidelines can see his mental state, his attitude, etc. It's stupid. Development isn't allowed. Drops, OL, playcall, etc.

The way I look at it, Sam isn't a problem...he isn't *costing* games.

Re Gibson look I never bashed the guy. He's a good guy and an OK WR. He actually has more yards and TDs in less games this year than all of last. I just think this is the best we're gonna get. But Gibby isn't costing games, either.

 

[Faceplant]

Please Hammah don't hurt em'. I'm on my phone so I won't be able to write a novella, but I personally do not get attached enough to any player to defend or criticize too much. I am about team. If Dieter flippin Brock rose from the ashes and came back to lead this team to a Superbowl at the age of 70, I would buy a #5 jersey. Just win baby....PLEASE!!!!!!! I have added absolutely nothing to this thread X, and for that I am sorry.

Sure you did. That's a valid view too.

But ... let me ask. Do you have a particular guy on this current squad that you really enjoy watching?

I enjoy watching them all when they are not tripping over themselves. Honestly though, for me....it's Bradford. He is the player I most defend AND criticize. I was a QB, and am always focused on that position more than any other (as are most people). I see so much potential in this kid...really. I think most of us (sane) fans do. That is why I get so frustrated with him when I feel he is not progressing. He IS of course progressing...just not as steadily as I had hoped. There are plenty of reasons/excuses for this, but those do not help me sleep most Sunday nights.

 

[-X-]

Re Bradford, b/c ppl act like he's the sole problem of the team. I always read "he has to do more" but no one ever explains what "more" is. Bring up QB rating, the most useless and skewed stat in sports.

Every fuckin loss is his fault. They act like they can see what Sam sees, know everything, and pretends to be a coach. How can one "know" he doesn't have "pocket awareness" or my favorite "lacks the football smarts." Like WTF does that even mean?

They pretend that the few seconds they see on the sidelines can see his mental state, his attitude, etc. It's stupid. Development isn't allowed. Drops, OL, playcall, etc.

The way I look at it, Sam isn't a problem...he isn't *costing* games.

Re Gibson look I never bashed the guy. He's a good guy and an OK WR. He actually has more yards and TDs in less games this year than all of last. I just think this is the best we're gonna get. But Gibby isn't costing games, either.

So ... it's an issue with the way other people form and present their criticisms?

What if I were to say that Bradford is a good athlete, with a big brain, strong arm, and all the talent in the world. But. I don't think he has that innate ability to extend plays like Romo or Roethlisberger, isn't fully up to par with his pre-snaps, and is too cautious right now with his decision-making? Taking into account that I don't think he's the problem, or even *a* problem. I just think that he's still got a little ways to go before being a well-rounded player. Which, as it turns out, is okay. Players tend to develop at different rates, and this one (Bradford), was actually set back in his development last year. I see good things coming from him, and I have the patience to let it play out because I know he's capable of being one of the greats. And now... he might actually start to see some stability. Who'da thunk it?

 

[HeiseNBerg]

Here's what I see (and some of it may be skewed by my own perception), but it seems the criticism of Sam is tied heavily to his contract -- over at the lesser board, any jab at Sam's performance on the field is usually accompanied by some comment along the lines of "you're not justifying the money they paid you", like it's coming out of their own pockets. To set the record straight -- prices on tickets, beer & food at the EJD, jerseys and any other form of Rams merchandise would cost exactly the same, whether or not Sam Bradford was on the Rams' payroll.

I just don't get the money argument -- Sam lucked into being drafted in the final year of the old CBA. Had the Rams drafted Suh instead, it could be argued that HE hasn't been earning his money the past 2 seasons, either.

Am I pleased with Bradford's play so far? Well, it depends on the week -- after the 9ers game, I thought that he had taken a big step forward. After last week -- well, the throw that burst my bubble was the one late in the first half to a wide open Austin Pettis...and the ball landed at AP's feet. Had they connected, it could have gone for a TD.

But at the same time, I'm not so simple-minded that I equate (anything < 100% perfection) = (100% failure)

 

[brokeu91]

Well, I've been around the world, from London to the Bay

I don't know why I feel the need to support certain players. Sometimes I just think they haven't had a fair chance and they are getting criticized way too early and for things that are not his fault. Bradford comes to mind, sometimes people (especially on RamsTalk) criticize him for things that he was not responsible for or things he could not change. For instance he throws an interception because his WR was dragged down, ran the wrong route or slowed down mid route. Suddenly he's terrible, when he did exactly what he should have done. A lot of people who criticize Sam are people who thought we should draft RG3 or Suh and they just want to be proven right. It does get on my nerves when it's the same people making the same dumb arguments, most of which are false or incorrect.

 

[-X-]

I just don't get the money argument -- Sam lucked into being drafted in the final year of the old CBA. Had the Rams drafted Suh instead, it could be argued that HE hasn't been earning his money the past 2 seasons, either.

That's from the self-appointed Rams Cap Managers (aka, fans who can [or can't] balance a checkbook).

As if the Rams would take it upon themselves to be the ONLY team not to separate themselves from a financial mistake. They just don't feel as though he IS a financial mistake. I don't know how many times Snead and Fisher need to say it before it becomes ingrained, but I suppose the answer is somewhere in the area of forty trillion. Because some people will always label that as coach-speak or GM-speak. Fact is, the Rams haven't been handicapped because of Bradford's contract. They signed Finnegan to a $50M contract, Laurinaitis to a $42M contract, and Long to a $60M contract. If Bradford, Finnegan, Long & Laurinaitis are the core players that Fisher and Snead want on this team, then fans (imo) should shut the fuck up about it and accept it. Let the REAL financial manager (Demoff) worry about cutting checks, and let Fisher worry about cutting players. So, yeah ... considering the flawed system of the draft from previous years ... you're right. It's a stupid argument.

And aside from that, QBs are just overvalued anyway. Stafford signed a $72M contract, Kolb signed a $63M contract, Cassel signed a $63M contract, Fitzpatrick signed a $62M contract, Vick signed a $100M contract, etc, etc. The problem is in Bradford's guaranteed money, but even that's not a problem apparently, and it can always be restructured.

 

[bluecoconuts]

When I criticize a player I never attack them as a person. I just look at their play on the field. I take into account everything that is going on though, not just the single player.

I defend Sam to the death, but I don't believe he's gotten anything close to a fair shake. 30 receiver, over 20 linemen in his first 3 years. I don't think there's a single QB in the history of the NFL that has had to deal with that in his first three years, especially not on the same team. I haven't done the research obviously, but I can't think of any. So right off the bat, I think with Bradford you have to factor things in. He's not making a bunch of bone headed mistakes either, often times he's being let down by the players around him. They're not blocking well enough, or getting open enough, etc.

Bradford isn't perfect, I'll admit that, But when people say he's a bust and to just insert in another QB to fix the problem, I will say otherwise. If we did that, all we would be doing is starting from square one without doing anything to help the QB.


Now when I criticize players like Gibson or Dahl, it's usually because of their play on the field. Again, I think they're great guys. In fact I think they can contribute to this team. I think Gibson would be a great #2 receiver, or a guy who rotates in on certain packages. I don't like him as a full time starter because he's makes too many mental errors, not running the right route, not lining up correctly, not reading the defense correctly, etc. Given his time in the NFL I don't think those are going to get much better (although they could if it's because it's a new playbook), so as a full time starter I'm not a fan. If he was rotating in for certain packages though I'm all for it. He can contribute for sure.


Not really helping either, this is a good question... I guess to summarize it, when people criticize players, any players, I'd rather a logical explanation on why they think that way, what their faults are, and if/how they can improve that. When it's just "he sucks I hate him!" it doesn't do anything. With the case of Sam I defend him a little more because the talent he has and potential he has, if we ruined him and then got another QB without improving the situation, we'd just be looking at another 5+ years of shit.

 

[Stranger]

Is it the WAY people criticize that makes you take offense and become deeply ingrained in your position?

Is it that you feel people just don't see what you see?

Is it because the guy you defend is a really good guy (in general)?

Is it because some people refuse to validate a different opinion?

Just curious.

It's the irrationality!

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

In answer to the "introspection" (glad you defined it) I'll look no further but of course not limited to Sam Bradford.

As a new member here I'll state I'm a huge Bradford supporter (to the bitter end) I will be untill the time comes where he can't get the ball to the receivers when he's provided 3 seconds or more to do so on a consistent basis.

I'm not going to research stats or anything like that, not going to have my opinions swayed by wannabe coach's - just defer to my years and years of football watching and understanding. No dumb debates to engage on this subject, either you see it or you don't.

Kinda like Kurt Warner, I defended him to the end, my only defense (near his end with the Rams) was If I observe Kurt having time to deliver time and time again and still stink up the joint then fine, replace him...never saw it.

Looks like I'm going with A on this one.

 

[Ram Quixote]

There are things said about different players that offend me, but the worst are those with the AGENDA. Those that have to be right; those that dislike a player; those that like a player and see another as an impediment to their player's PT; those who don't like the HC, OC or DC because they want a different HC, OC or DC.

I'm a Rams fan and if they're on the roster I don't see why I shouldn't defend them. That doesn't mean I don't recognize fair criticism or understand good play from bad or who on the roster is better or worse.

If I were to go deeper, one might say that I defend the Rams to support my short-term desires for success; that the Rams roster is good enough for a playoff run. But I'm not so far into denial. At least not in Week 12.

 

[stan]

I'm not invested in any player on this team. So defending a player over time isn't an issue. Rams are rebuilding and that means lockers will continue to become available at Rams Park. I will defend the hiring of Jeff Fisher because I've said I've wanted him as head coach of the Rams since Martz left long before Fisher left the Titans. Doesn't mean I have to agree with everything he does or says regarding the Rams. Blind homerism is stupid especially for 'adults'. Talk is cheap and it's the Show Me state. So Show Me Rams. Show Me Fisher. As a Rams fan I know I've paid my dues. Everyone here wants another Lombardi Trophy at Rams Park and the hope that there are many more to come in the near future.

 

[joeybittick]

I am not sure if this is exactly what you wanted, but I don't know if it is actually particular players that make me argue until I am blue in the face it's more... blind defense or criticism bothers me. Like, I guess it's a poorly formed argument.

I am the same way with politics, religion, philosophy, sports, and anything else. If your argument is based on faulty logic (or lazy logic) I will argue forever, even if I know there is really no way of changing your POV. Message boards are full of those kind of arguments (at least I see them that way) so if I were to really allow myself to, I would never leave my computer. I would be red font 2.0 and everyone here would despise me because I can never let it go.

And, to be completely honest, I do not believe that putting "IMO" at the end of something makes it OK for someone to say something. IMO ( :tooth: ) not all opinions are valid. Some are just wrong. If I say (to get back on topic) "IMO, Bradford is the worst QB in the history of the NFL" or "Bradford is the best QB in the NFL", those may be opinions, but they are absolutely wrong. He COULD become the best or the worst, but he is not, at this moment, either.

Many times, the arguments about the Rams stem from extreme points of view. It's like watching the Republicans vs. the Democrats, both sides just blindly defend their positions against the other, largely because they can't stand for the other side to be right because neither side likes the other.

Now, not to say which side is what political party, but I can say that I definitely lean towards the "blind defense" side when it comes to the Rams. When I see the idiots on the PD spewing their putrid shit about "So and So is the worst player blah blah blah", I want to spew shit right back, but not just at them... I want to take out their families as well. (P.S. that last part was a joke :boing: ).

I think the difference for me though is this; yes, I will defend the Rams "to the death", but I can also admit that just about every player on this team could (and maybe needs to) improve in at least one area. To say that Bradford is perfect and every single bad play made is the fault of the supporting cast is... irrational and kind of stupid.

I understand why that argument is made; it is scary as fuck to think that Bradford may not succeed. But just because Bradford needs to improve does not make him a bust. And just because Cam Newton, RGIII, Andrew Luck, etc start out stronger than Bradford does not mean that they will end up the better player. It does not make Bradford a bust.

So, yeah, that is a long, rambling mess up there, so I will try to sum it up. Someone presenting an argument, even if it is opposite of mine, that is well reasoned and based on sound logic will never bother me. But the assholes who just want to run their mouths without anything to back up their POV (even if they say "IMO" :neh: )will always make me want to punch the internet in the balls.

 

[Young Ram]

The only player I have really defended is SJ39.

Here you have a player who has given everything to this franchise. He has played on very bad teams and not once has he complained. 7 straight 1,000+ yard seasons behind woeful O-lines, that to me is remarkable.

Every year I have heard and read "Trade SJ", "He's slowing down", "He's not productive" and every year he has proved those nay sayers wrong. Many don't appreciate what SJ has done.

 

[Angry Ram]

Re Bradford, b/c ppl act like he's the sole problem of the team. I always read "he has to do more" but no one ever explains what "more" is. Bring up QB rating, the most useless and skewed stat in sports.

Every fuckin loss is his fault. They act like they can see what Sam sees, know everything, and pretends to be a coach. How can one "know" he doesn't have "pocket awareness" or my favorite "lacks the football smarts." Like WTF does that even mean?

They pretend that the few seconds they see on the sidelines can see his mental state, his attitude, etc. It's stupid. Development isn't allowed. Drops, OL, playcall, etc.

The way I look at it, Sam isn't a problem...he isn't *costing* games.

Re Gibson look I never bashed the guy. He's a good guy and an OK WR. He actually has more yards and TDs in less games this year than all of last. I just think this is the best we're gonna get. But Gibby isn't costing games, either.

So ... it's an issue with the way other people form and present their criticisms?

What if I were to say that Bradford is a good athlete, with a big brain, strong arm, and all the talent in the world. But. I don't think he has that innate ability to extend plays like Romo or Roethlisberger, isn't fully up to par with his pre-snaps, and is too cautious right now with his decision-making? Taking into account that I don't think he's the problem, or even *a* problem. I just think that he's still got a little ways to go before being a well-rounded player. Which, as it turns out, is okay. Players tend to develop at different rates, and this one (Bradford), was actually set back in his development last year. I see good things coming from him, and I have the patience to let it play out because I know he's capable of being one of the greats. And now... he might actually start to see some stability. Who'da thunk it?

That's fine.

It's stupid shit like "he lacks football smarts" that piss me off.

Especially this year, when he's improved especially in the clutch. Not his fault the D can't get 1 stop when it counts.

Here's this way...ppl act like RG3 is so incredibly awesome (which he is), but the Redskins are 5-6. Rams can be just a half game behind them on Sunday. They lost 6 games because of bad defense. But in St. Louis, it's Sam's fault.

Fuckin stupid.

 

[-X-]

Re Bradford, b/c ppl act like he's the sole problem of the team. I always read "he has to do more" but no one ever explains what "more" is. Bring up QB rating, the most useless and skewed stat in sports.

Every fuckin loss is his fault. They act like they can see what Sam sees, know everything, and pretends to be a coach. How can one "know" he doesn't have "pocket awareness" or my favorite "lacks the football smarts." Like WTF does that even mean?

They pretend that the few seconds they see on the sidelines can see his mental state, his attitude, etc. It's stupid. Development isn't allowed. Drops, OL, playcall, etc.

The way I look at it, Sam isn't a problem...he isn't *costing* games.

Re Gibson look I never bashed the guy. He's a good guy and an OK WR. He actually has more yards and TDs in less games this year than all of last. I just think this is the best we're gonna get. But Gibby isn't costing games, either.

So ... it's an issue with the way other people form and present their criticisms?

What if I were to say that Bradford is a good athlete, with a big brain, strong arm, and all the talent in the world. But. I don't think he has that innate ability to extend plays like Romo or Roethlisberger, isn't fully up to par with his pre-snaps, and is too cautious right now with his decision-making? Taking into account that I don't think he's the problem, or even *a* problem. I just think that he's still got a little ways to go before being a well-rounded player. Which, as it turns out, is okay. Players tend to develop at different rates, and this one (Bradford), was actually set back in his development last year. I see good things coming from him, and I have the patience to let it play out because I know he's capable of being one of the greats. And now... he might actually start to see some stability. Who'da thunk it?

That's fine.

It's stupid shit like "he lacks football smarts" that piss me off.

Especially this year, when he's improved especially in the clutch. Not his fault the D can't get 1 stop when it counts.

Here's this way...ppl act like RG3 is so incredibly awesome (which he is), but the Redskins are 5-6. Rams can be just a half game behind them on Sunday. They lost 6 games because of bad defense. But in St. Louis, it's Sam's fault.

Fuckin stupid.

I hear ya. Every day there's a new Bradford thread over there, or at least there was when I left (which is actually WHY I left). It's like the guy can't ever take a sack or throw an incompletion without some jackhole saying it's a defining moment in his career. And that, sometimes, makes me defend Bradford even more. It's those people. The ones who don't have a clue about what it takes for a QB to succeed. They make me crazy.

 

[rickrawk]

Introspection time, eh? Okay, here goes.
First of all, I want to say that I'm impressed with the way all you guys here at Rams On Demand are able to express your points of view. Me, personally, am not long winded, so when I post something It's usually a sentence or two. But for me it's real simple. This year I am celebrating 50 years as a Rams fan. In 1962, at ten years old, my dad and grandpa took me to my first Rams game at the L.A. Coliseum. All the way there they were telling me how great it was gonna be. I remember when the team came onto the field, I sat there in Awe. From that moment until today, I have always felt blessed and privileged to be a Rams fan. Whether seeing them live, or on TV, or listening on the radio, I always believe the next play is gonna be something great. Sure, I get pissed off when they make a boneheaded play or a stupid(IMO) call or whatever, but I don't think I've ever been critical of any one player or coach. Hell, I was the biggest Tony Banks supporter when he was here. Why? Because he was a Ram. Simple.
So much for my lack of longwindedness.(is that a word?)
In closing, I do agree with most of what you guys post.
I'll shut up now.

GO RAMS!!!!

 

[RamFan503]

I suppose I tend to defend any player that is currently wearing THE horns. The great Ram players will always have a spot in my heart but once the others don a different uni - all bets are off. One of the things that I love about this site is that I don't have to deal with a whole lot of people bashing my Rams players.

Criticism is ok as long as it is tempered. Sam threw a bad pass here. Quick should have gone after the ball there. Yeah - I'm ok with that. Second guessing and railing on players/coaches/FO? - can't get with that. I can't even go over to the PD site anymore. It's just no fun for me anymore. I got burned out on the carping long ago. I even got pulled into some of that shit in some of the bazillion Bulger threads. That's just not ME.

So I guess my answer would be that there needs to be respect in criticism - at least toward my Rams. There has to be rationality in criticism - at least toward my Rams. And if it appears to me that all you want to do is gripe about MY RAMS - you can go smoke a pole.