First Take: Seattle Michael Robinson Talks Rams

[Robocop]

In Bulger's heyday he was a top 5 QB in the league. The only reason he wasn't appreciated was because we let a superior QB go to play him. Bulger was a very good QB the dude had zero swagger. The team won games with him as QB. I think the swagger thing is overrated. You are either a good QB or your not. Yesterday in an interview Timmerman talked about how Warner wasn't fiery. We won a Super Bowl with a non-fiery guy.

Bottom line is if we win games the media will praise Bradford. We lose they bury him. See Phillip Rivers.

Agreed. Bulger was a great QB if he had a top 10 caliber team he would been a star. Didn't lead vocally much like Bradford. At least not that we hear about but he did get vocal towards the end a long with jackson when they said straight up the team was just quitting on them. Bulger shouldve started over Flacco when he went to Baltimore. Period.

 

[Boffo97]

Agreed. Bulger was a great QB if he had a top 10 caliber team he would been a star. Didn't lead vocally much like Bradford. At least not that we hear about but he did get vocal towards the end a long with jackson when they said straight up the team was just quitting on them. Bulger shouldve started over Flacco when he went to Baltimore. Period.

I was a big Bulger fan, but at that point, he was pretty well Bulgerized.

Thankfully, Bradford's not quite there yet. If the Rams were dumb enough to cut Bradford, he'd be starting for some other team and that other team would likely do a lot better than the Rams.

 

[AZRamsFan93]

A. Supporting cast for a QB is not the rest of the team. It's the offensive talent around him.
B. He said both competent and experienced.
C. There was no blame assigned.

I don't really care to argue about something so trivial but you definitely misrepresented what he said by choosing to see what you wanted to see in his words.

A. Yes I did not presume he meant the defense. I should have clarified that he was only disparaging the rest of the offense.
B. Adding "experienced" does not erase saying they are not competent. Calling someone incompetent in their job is a damning indictment. Incompetent people will be, or should be fired.
C. You are kidding, right? He never actually said "blame" but the implication was not subtle.

 

[jrry32]

If anything is a personal attack, it's this.

You're right, Boffo, nothing you said was a personal attack. But this isn't a personal attack either.

That phrase gets thrown around a little too often for this board. This isn't the PD Board. You rarely see personal attacks on here and the people in charge typically act quickly to stop it.

 

[AZRamsFan93]

Nothing I said was a personal attack. I just think it's a misrepresentation of his argument (and one that's been seen from many Bradford bashers, typically followed by "Bradford needs absolute perfection to succeed!".)

Yes, the offensive product hasn't been what it should be for most of the time since Sam came here. But rather than go "He's the leader, he must have the the most responsibility for the product", most here choose to actually look at what's going on, and we see the basic support that even the best QB in the world would need to succeed consistently not being given. When it is, Sam absolutely needs to step up his game and has been showing signs of that.

But if that's supposedly throwing the rest of the team under the bus, then what you're doing is throwing Sam under the bus, as your definition of "throwing under the bus" apparently doesn't require much in the way of criticism.


If anything is a personal attack, it's this.

Calling someone's argument a straw man is implying an attempt to misrepresent, which IMHO is an attack on the poster rather than a rebuttal of the argument. How is it not?

 

[jrry32]

A. Yes I did not presume he meant the defense. I should have clarified that he was only disparaging the rest of the offense.
B. Adding "experienced" does not erase saying they are not competent. Calling someone incompetent in their job is a damning indictment. Incompetent people will be, or should be fired.
C. You are kidding, right? He never actually said "blame" but the implication was not subtle.

B. It does give an explanation of why they might not yet be competent, though. Tavon was incompetent last year while Sam was playing. He's absolutely right, for the most part, Sam's supporting cast has either been inexperienced or incompetent or both. There haven't been many competent, experienced players on our offense the past couple of years(Long, Amendola, Wells, Saffold, Jackson). And those that have been, have typically not stayed healthy.

C. Nope, not kidding. He never placed blame on any one person. The only implication he made was that the supporting cast takes some fault in Sam's issues. I did not see him say anything about Bradford being blameless or the supporting cast being totally at fault. You chose to comprehend it that way and accuse him of it when the truth is that he never said it. You can't create implications that you think a person made. That's exactly how you misrepresent their words and create a straw man argument.

 

[AZRamsFan93]

I was a big Bulger fan, but at that point, he was pretty well Bulgerized.

Thankfully, Bradford's not quite there yet. If the Rams were dumb enough to cut Bradford, he'd be starting for some other team and that other team would likely do a lot better than the Rams.

The Rams will not and should not cut Sam.

That doesn't mean that, as a fan of the team, not the player, I cannot expect better performance from the player, for the betterment of the team.

 

[rhinobean]

This thread has got convoluted to the point it is not fun! Let's bring up the merits of our starting qb again after the bye week, okay?

 

[jrry32]

Calling someone's argument a straw man is implying an attempt to misrepresent, which IMHO is an attack on the poster rather than a rebuttal of the argument. How is it not?

It's pointing out a logical fallacy which is a logical flaw in an argument. Pointing out flaws in an argument is not a personal attack. He's not attacking your character or your person. No reason to take a disagreement personally. He disagrees with the case your making and he's pointing out the flaws he sees. It's not personal.

 

[AZRamsFan93]

B. It does give an explanation of why they might not yet be competent, though. Tavon was incompetent last year while Sam was playing. He's absolutely right, for the most part, Sam's supporting cast has either been inexperienced or incompetent or both. There haven't been many competent, experienced players on our offense the past couple of years(Long, Amendola, Wells, Saffold, Jackson). And those that have been, have typically not stayed healthy.

C. Nope, not kidding. He never placed blame on any one person. The only implication he made was that the supporting cast takes some fault in Sam's issues. I did not see him say anything about Bradford being blameless or the supporting cast being totally at fault. You chose to comprehend it that way and accuse him of it when the truth is that he never said it. You can't create implications that you think a person made. That's exactly how you misrepresent their words and create a straw man argument.

The only implication I have made is that Sam also deserves his fair share of the blame as the leader of the offense. He did not say (paraphrasing) "Sam has played poorly but so has his teammates", he implied "Sam has played poorly BECAUSE of his teammates".

 

[AZRamsFan93]

It's pointing out a logical fallacy which is a logical flaw in an argument. Pointing out flaws in an argument is not a personal attack. He's not attacking your character or your person. No reason to take a disagreement personally. He disagrees with the case your making and he's pointing out the flaws he sees. It's not personal.

Then he followed in a subsequent post to imply I am a Bradford "basher". I am nothing of the sort. He just gets no passes from me.

 

[AZRamsFan93]

This thread has got convoluted to the point it is not fun! Let's bring up the merits of our starting qb again after the bye week, okay?

That's fair.

 

[jrry32]

The only implication I have made is that Sam also deserves his fair share of the blame as the leader of the offense. He did not say (paraphrasing) "Sam has played poorly but so has his teammates", he implied "Sam has played poorly BECAUSE of his teammates".

He didn't say any of that. You chose to take that implication away from his words and attributed it to him. I can't make that any more explicit. You reading something someone said and then accusing them of implying something is misrepresenting their words. It's always best not to create implications. Read and take them at their explicit word. Because when someone accuses you of implying something, it's almost always going to be a straw man argument. They're going to read into it what they wanted to read into it and then take the path of least resistance when creating their argument.

Take him at his word. Don't accuse him of implying something when he didn't explicitly say it. You have no idea what he was thinking and there's no reason to try to come to your own conclusions on it.

This is it for me. I'm not going to continue to argue this. From an objective observer, you misrepresented what he said by creating an implication and accusing him of meaning it. Fin.

 

[mr.stlouis]

Michael Robinson is not in the media. He is a player.

He gave his opinion in front of the cameras and amongst analysts. Today he was the media.

 

[Boffo97]

You're right, Boffo, nothing you said was a personal attack. But this isn't a personal attack either.

That phrase gets thrown around a little too often for this board. This isn't the PD Board. You rarely see personal attacks on here and the people in charge typically act quickly to stop it.

I'll agree... I meant the emphasis there to be on "If anything is" (which would thus include the possibility that nothing was).

Calling someone's argument a straw man is implying an attempt to misrepresent, which IMHO is an attack on the poster rather than a rebuttal of the argument. How is it not?

jrry32 apparently broke into my head. Basically his answer sums it up nicely. And I hope jrry wasn't too scared of anything in there.

Then he followed in a subsequent post to imply I am a Bradford "basher". I am nothing of the sort. He just gets no passes from me.

No implication was intended, and I do apologize for that. If we can't agree how much blame goes on Bradford, that's fine. We both hope the team and everyone involved will do better, and even if it's not his fault, Bradford doesn't have TOO much time left for that to happen.

 

[shaunpinney]

WOW this thread is getting heated

In my opinion - Sam is a great QB especially for such a young team like the Rams, he shows composure under tremendous pressure, when we're getting our a$$e$ whooped, the dude stays calm, you don't want a guy thats going to get riled up and throw 3 interceptions in the final quarter.

The man TAKES the hit. The man GETS UP. The man PLAYS HARD. He doesn't jib out of a ballgame if we're behind with a tweaked muscle, or after taking a heavy knock. He stays in there

I for one love seeing him take the game by the scruff of the neck when we're down in the 4th, his no huddle quick offense is a beautiful thing and I loved watching it last season, I think thats when his leadership shows. That 15 minutes against Atlanta last season was a thing of beauty...

BUT - I know Fisher isn't a big fan of the no-huddle, which is a damn shame because I for one think it suits our offense a lot, especially with guys like Austin on board...

 

[So Ram]

Colin Kaepernick would look terrible here. Luck is overrated. I'm not sure how RGIII would have looked. Newton is a freak. He would have been okay. Wilson would have been less impressive than he has been but solid.

Luck had one of the best come from behind victories in NFL history.
F-that Luck is underrated !!

That is crazy to even think.He came in and had to replace the best QB in NFL history when it is all said and done.He didn't just replace him.They put all there faith in him.Peyton was let go.They could have franchised him.Peyton just went to the Super Bowl & had one of the best seasons any QB has ever had once again.Still Colts are Happy with The Underrated A.Luck.
--Kap doesn't wear his Cap on right .Still it is not about his looks. He has proved himself,and earned his spot by replacing a All/Pro QB.He will be so good this season with all his WR/TE this year.Him & Crabtree caught fire last year.Maybe he has lost to years in a row on last plays to be a Super Bowl Champ.He at least gave SF a chance.
--Cam ?? He is not playing with many weapons.Don't know what Bradford would have looked like in Carolina blue ?
---RG111 was great last year !! Love the #2 Robinson pick & the slew of other Rams from trade.Could not have worked out better.
----Can't wait to destroy Russell Wilson.He is a good QB at game management,but not a great passer.Donald will force him right in Chris Long arms.

 

[So Ram]

Those guys didn't start games with the likes of Jason Brown, Jacob Bell, Jason Smith, Adam Golberg, Wayne Hunter, Barry Richardson, Robert Turner, Quinn Ojinnakka, Chris Williams, Shelly Smith being key parts of the offensive line. Think about that. Those guys were well below average linemen. Then throw in the fact that Bradford's best receivers were Mark Clayton, Danario Alexander, and Danny Amendola. All three missed huge time due to injury. Brandon Gibson was the most consistent receiver Bradford has. Also he had to learn three different offenses his first three years. In 2014 Eli Manning will just be starting with his second offense. The circumstances Bradford has had to endure have been tough. Only Alex Smith, David Carr, and Eric Couch can compare. Two of those 3 guys were on expansion teams. Our offensive talent was as bad as an expansion team. That's what makes it very difficult to compare QBs.

That is all fine with Bradford & his excuses.He has had it tough,I'll agree for sure.He is not a winner as of yet in the NFL.
5-2-1 is a start for his confidence.I'm not doubting his talent,but his mental toughness has been challenged.He needs to win NOW !!
What was his excuse the first 4 games last year ? I'll blame Fisher for putting The Rams in Bradford's hands.He is good,but needs a real good supporting cast.Can he be great ? Yes,but it is between the ears.
Sam Bradford had a great work ethic that might make him great. Time will tell, but once again the time is NOW !!!

 

[FRO]

Luck had one of the best come from behind victories in NFL history.
F-that Luck is underrated !!

That is crazy to even think.He came in and had to replace the best QB in NFL history when it is all said and done.He didn't just replace him.They put all there faith in him.Peyton was let go.They could have franchised him.Peyton just went to the Super Bowl & had one of the best seasons any QB has ever had once again.Still Colts are Happy with The Underrated A.Luck.
--Kap doesn't wear his Cap on right .Still it is not about his looks. He has proved himself,and earned his spot by replacing a All/Pro QB.He will be so good this season with all his WR/TE this year.Him & Crabtree caught fire last year.Maybe he has lost to years in a row on last plays to be a Super Bowl Champ.He at least gave SF a chance.
--Cam ?? He is not playing with many weapons.Don't know what Bradford would have looked like in Carolina blue ?
---RG111 was great last year !! Love the #2 Robinson pick & the slew of other Rams from trade.Could not have worked out better.
----Can't wait to destroy Russell Wilson.He is a good QB at game management,but not a great passer.Donald will force him right in Chris Long arms.

-He didn't say Luck was bad, just overrated.

- Kaepernick has the best offensive line in the league in front of him. Stud receivers in Bolden, Crabtree and Davis. He has Gore at RB. Pretty hard for a QB to fail in that situation. Kaepernick on the 2010-2013 Rams would have sucked.

- Newton had Steve Smith and Jordan Gross helping him throughout his career. 2014 he has nothing. It's going to be interesting to see how he does with nothing.

- RGIII has some big time talent around him, and you will be hard pressed to find a supporting cast in 2014 better than what he will have.

- Wilson at this point is a game manager. Nothing wrong with that.

I like all those QBs above outside of Kaepernick. All of those QBs above have had much better circumstances than Bradford.

 

[FRO]

That is all fine with Bradford & his excuses.He has had it tough,I'll agree for sure.He is not a winner as of yet in the NFL.
5-2-1 is a start for his confidence.I'm not doubting his talent,but his mental toughness has been challenged.He needs to win NOW !!
What was his excuse the first 4 games last year ? I'll blame Fisher for putting The Rams in Bradford's hands.He is good,but needs a real good supporting cast.Can he be great ? Yes,but it is between the ears.
Sam Bradford had a great work ethic that might make him great. Time will tell, but once again the time is NOW !!!

The "Winner" argument is a terrible one for a QB. Teams win games. Bradford was drafted by a team that won 6 games total the previous three years before he was drafted. That's brutally bad, and outside of Steven Jackson there was absolutely nothing on the offense. Nothing. And Jackson was on a downward trend after his great year in 2009.