The Book On Bradford

[-X-]

<a class="postlink" href="http://ramblingsofpaul.tumblr.com/post/64201988768/the-book-on-bradford" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://ramblingsofpaul.tumblr.com/post/ ... n-bradford</a>

I have finally figured Sam Bradford out. Why did he look so bad in the 49ers game, and then almost have a perfect score last week with several aggressive deep throws? My answer: Bradford is a Comfort Quarterback. I have always known there are different types of quarterbacks, but I have never found the right labels for the categories I recognized. I finally believe I have discovered the proper labels. There are several types of quarterbacks. 1. Adaptive 2. Comfort, 3. Game Managers, 4. Hero, 5. Bad. To highlight the distinction I am trying to make, let’s define these terms.

Adaptive QB: A quarterback who can play well in any situation, whether the best payer on a bad team, the game manager on a great team, the hero bringing the team back from a huge deficit, or the dominant killer who loves a lead and builds on it. This QB will look like he Hero (defined below) on a bad team, but will show his excellence on a mediocre to good team because he makes others better around him. Ex. Peyton Manning, Tom Brady

Comfort QB: A quarterback who plays well on a team where he can rely on others to do their job, and he is just one of several good players that opposing teams have to worry about. This QB tends to excel on a winning that is at least adequate in all areas of the game, but almost never pays well on bad team that requires excellence from him to win. On a good team, this quarterback will look like an Adaptive QB. In short, this QB needs his “comfort zone” to succeed. Ex. Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Kurt Warner

Game Manager: This quarteback has limited skills. If given the right situation, where he is only asked to move the ball forward, and not turn it over, he can win. However, this QB will almost never attack downfield nor have huge stats. Like the Comfort QB, he will help a winning team win, but he will never look like an Adaptive QB. Ex. Trent Dilfer, Alex Smith,

Hero: This is the quarterback with the 80 yard arm, big stats, and inconsistent results. He loves being on a bad team where success requires excellence from him because he can take risks without remorse. However, when he is asked to play the role of a game manager (which all QB’s need to do for at least limited times) he crumbles into a blob of mistakes. Ex. Jeff George, Tony Romo, Michael Vick.

Bad: simply stated, this guy sucks. He may have one excellent characteristic to make you dream of his greatness, but you always wake up eventually to witness his failure.

The QB that always causes debate and heartache is the Comfort QB. Everyone wants the Adaptive QB, but he is rare. Furthermore, there is always a hero QB in the league, and the football related message boards are full on people complaining that the Comfort QB is not the Hero. Sometimes, the Comfort QB never makes it because he is drafted by a bad team and never gets in the situation he needs. At the same time, the Comfort QB can be mistaken for an Adaptive QB, and it will not be discovered until he is forced to struggle on a bad team. Look at Eli Manning who some were suggesting was better than Peyton, which just looks ludicrous this year.

The problem with Sam is we have all been trying to figure out whether he is an Adaptive QB or a Game Manager. No one has suggested he is a Hero QB. Yes, some have suggested he is a Bad QB, but those people are haters that complain about Albert Pujols jogging to first. We have all forgotten about the other type of QB because no one ever dreams of drafting a Comfort QB. Moreover, fans tend to get confused by the inconsistency of the Comfort QB.

Each Comfort QB may have a different Comfort Zone. Kurt Warner liked to attack, but Sam Bradford’s comfort zone is the Game Manager role. When allowed to play the Game Manager, he will take calculated risks and he has the skills to succeed when voluntarily taking those risks. Sam has shown a propensity to do well in the 4th quarter when we need a last minute drive. There is a reason for that success. The other team is in a prevent defense, and the underneath stuff is almost conceded. Sam loves the underneath stuff. Now that we are having success running the ball, The intermediate stuff is becoming less risky because the defense has to at least worry about the run.

For those of you complaining about Sam’s use of the underneath stuff, please go back and check Tom Brady’s stats, in particular his last minute drives. I probably would have called Tom Brady a Comfort QB, if I did not witness his greatness when he had Randy Moss. Brady is afraid of nothing. If needed, he will take as much risk as Jeff George. However, Brady has made a living on the underneath, especially in his last minute drives. Last week, is just another example.

Going back to the Rams, I was flabbergasted when Fischer came out two weeks ago claiming we were going to fix our problems by running the ball more, when that was our weakest skill. Now, I get it. Fisher saw what I did not. He saw what Bradford was and realized that the threat of a running game was vital to allow us to begin using our new weapons. If you want to see that seam route again to Cook, Sam wants to see the safety coming up to stop the run. If you want Tavon to have some room for YAC, Sam demas that the linebackers worry about the RB. Sam Bradford is not going to take the Hero risk. It just isn’t in his makeup.

Some of you may be upset that we don’t have the Adaptive QB, but I a not. Since I made up these categories, I can comfortably tell you that Joe Montana wasn’t an Adaptive QB. He was a Comfort QB. I would not mind having the next Joe Montana. I also suspect Dallas would not mind have a little Bradford in their QB right now.

These are my thoughts on Bradford, please let me know if you disagree. I love a good debate.

 

[Selassie I]

:shit:

 

[max]

I thought that was an interesting read. A lot of it made sense.

 

[fastcat]

I thought that was an interesting read. A lot of it made sense.

Yea it was and I don't believe I ever heard the qb position broke down like that... That guy needs to patent that and sell it to ESPN, lol.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[mr.stlouis]

Dude, that was amazing and I agree. Bradford will never be a P. Manning, poster child the adaptive QB, but as the team progresses his comfort zone will expand. Maybe there is hope the team will gel to the point that we won't be able to tell the difference. Bradford will make the most over what's there most of the time, but not much more.

And I disagree on Warner, that guy was adaptive. Adaptive QB's can also create what isn't initially there (running or throwing guys open) Bradford doesn't do that, Warner did it on two Super Bowl sleeper teams.

 

[V3]

You lose me when you start saying Sam is a comfort QB whose comfort is as a game manager but then you have game manager as a separate category.

I personally think Sam is a game manger that flashes higher abilities- but only when everything around him is right.

 

[TexasRam]

When Sam's receivers catch, he gets decent protection and gets some competent playcalling he appears to be very "adaptive".

When those 3 fall apart he looks like a bust.

So call it comfort if you want. Even Brady has looked very "comfort" this year.

I like the overall idea of the concepts but it's hard to see black and white here. There is alot of Blurred lines when a Brady looks bad but is still an "adaptive QB".

I do agree on the Profile for Bradford described here. He likes it safe that is for sure.

BTW Peyton has a little bit of a gunslinger mentality in big games that puts him in the Romo class in my book. The Super Bowl interception comes to mind. The Interception in the championship last year. The list goes on. So how Adaptive is he really. Or how "Great" is he? Warners Interceptions in Super Bowls lost. Favres interceptions in big games. Even Brady twice having down games in Super Bowls.

I would agree Game Manager aint all that bad sometimes.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Bradford looks like a star when his confidence is high and a bust when it is low. So, to me he seem like an immature QB. As time goes by maybe he starts to enjoy some success and then we all see what he really is. The up and down path of his career so far has hindered his development.

 

[jrry32]

X, I plan on giving you a more detailed response when it isn't 6 AM and I'm not sobering up after a long night of "college". I will say, though, that I think the Book of Bradford is largely unwritten/unread. We're only a few chapters in.

I'll go into greater detail when I come out of my coma tomorrow afternoon.

 

[Faceplant]

Meh. Not sure I care what label we put on our QB. There were some interesting points there, but nothing we didn't already know about Sam and these other QBs. I agree with mr stlouis that Warner should be in the "adaptive" category if any at all. When he was healthy, he was as deadly as any QB I have ever seen. I think his struggles were related to that damn thumb/hand injury that pretty much ended our dynasty. Thanks for the read.

 

[max]

I believe there are different degrees or levels of QB proficiency that get over simplified. And I do believe Bradford is more than the game manager Alex Smith is.

When I hear a guy like Venturi say things like, when you only throw the ball 16 times and focus on running the ball you keep Bradford within the range of his abilities, I just roll my eyes at such a black and white, extreme perspective.

The range of his abilities? Hmmm, would those be the abilities that produce 3 TDs and 0 INTs in a game?

Alex Smith has never thrown more than 18 TD in a season. That's a game manager.

I do believe they were asking Bradford to do more than he was capable of doing at this time. Sure, a guy like Brady would have been just fine handling it, but Sam wasn't ready for it. I agree with Vermeil who said Bradford was mentally overloaded by all the coaching.

And I think some of these points are lost on the majority of analysts, including Venturi, Cosell, and Jaworski.

 

[kurtfaulk]

Dude, that was amazing and I agree. Bradford will never be a P. Manning, poster child the adaptive QB, but as the team progresses his comfort zone will expand. Maybe there is hope the team will gel to the point that we won't be able to tell the difference. Bradford will make the most over what's there most of the time, but not much more.

And I disagree on Warner, that guy was adaptive. Adaptive QB's can also create what isn't initially there (running or throwing guys open) Bradford doesn't do that, Warner did it on two Super Bowl sleeper teams.

you can't get more adaptive than going from marshall faulk to the worst running attack in the league and still playing lights out.

admittedly he had a few years in between where he was rather average but injuries and ill fitting offenses were the cause of that.

.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

There is a link at the top of the article. IS this X's article or is he linking someone else's?

 

[-X-]

There is a link at the top of the article. IS this X's article or is he linking someone else's?

Someone else's.

.

sent via Tapatalk.

 

[max]

Dude, that was amazing and I agree. Bradford will never be a P. Manning, poster child the adaptive QB, but as the team progresses his comfort zone will expand. Maybe there is hope the team will gel to the point that we won't be able to tell the difference. Bradford will make the most over what's there most of the time, but not much more.

And I disagree on Warner, that guy was adaptive. Adaptive QB's can also create what isn't initially there (running or throwing guys open) Bradford doesn't do that, Warner did it on two Super Bowl sleeper teams.

you can't get more adaptive than going from marshall faulk to the worst running attack in the league and still playing lights out.

admittedly he had a few years in between where he was rather average but injuries and ill fitting offenses were the cause of that.

.

I don't think it's that simple.

When Warner started he came into a very comfortable environment. He was surrounded by great players, HOF level players. And he did extremely well.

Then he was pretty bad due to injuries and a lesser supporting cast.

It took him 5 years to get back to his high level.

Remember Warner started 10 games for Az in 2005 and he was pretty average, throwing 11 TDs and 9 INTs with a passer rating of 85. I remember him looking pedestrian in 2005 and the general view was that he wasn't much more than a jag until 2007.

Kurt got his mojo back in 2007 for whatever reasons, health, confidence, comfort level, they are all in the conversation. By that time he was a savvy vet with 2 great WRs in Boldin and Fitz and he lit it up.

 

[nighttrain]

i'm of the opinion that what SB is or will become is still a great unknown
train

 

[fearsomefour]

Dude, that was amazing and I agree. Bradford will never be a P. Manning, poster child the adaptive QB, but as the team progresses his comfort zone will expand. Maybe there is hope the team will gel to the point that we won't be able to tell the difference. Bradford will make the most over what's there most of the time, but not much more.

And I disagree on Warner, that guy was adaptive. Adaptive QB's can also create what isn't initially there (running or throwing guys open) Bradford doesn't do that, Warner did it on two Super Bowl sleeper teams.

you can't get more adaptive than going from marshall faulk to the worst running attack in the league and still playing lights out.

admittedly he had a few years in between where he was rather average but injuries and ill fitting offenses were the cause of that.

.

I don't think it's that simple.

When Warner started he came into a very comfortable environment. He was surrounded by great players, HOF level players. And he did extremely well.

Then he was pretty bad due to injuries and a lesser supporting cast.

It took him 5 years to get back to his high level.

Remember Warner started 10 games for Az in 2005 and he was pretty average, throwing 11 TDs and 9 INTs with a passer rating of 85. I remember him looking pedestrian in 2005 and the general view was that he wasn't much more than a jag until 2007.

Kurt got his mojo back in 2007 for whatever reasons, health, confidence, comfort level, they are all in the conversation. By that time he was a savvy vet with 2 great WRs in Boldin and Fitz and he lit it up.

In my opinion....watched every game from 2005, that was one of Warners' best seasons. He had the worst Oline in football and no supporting cast at all. The Cardinals could not run the ball and had one WR worth mentioning. He was constantly put in bad situations by a team that was rebuilding. As far as the numbers they looked pedestrian, his performance was not. Watching him in 2005 he was his old self then. He had to dial some things back due to the cast around him (adaptive?) and did so.
That is the reason Arizona (despite Dennis Green and all of his stupidity) kept him around. It was not a case of suddenly being great again in 2007. His play in 2005 is about the only thing that kept that team together. The Cardinals kept Warner around because he was still a very good QB. Only Greens' exercise in bad player evaluation (Leinart) kept him rotating back to the bench. Other pieces had fallen into play by 2007 that allowed Warner to run the kind of offense that fits his skill set....one of the biggest pieces was Dennis Green coaching himself out of Arizona.

 

[max]

The Cardinals had one WR worth mentioning.

Well that's wrong. They had Fitz and Boldin. 2 Pro Bowl quality WRs. And Warner had only 11 TDs. Warner wasn't good in 2005.

 

[bwdenverram]

Personally, I think it's a pretty fair assement. There's a reason the Mannings and the Brady's of the world don't come along often. And if Bradford is in the same class (or can be) as Warner I don't think too may would complain. He certainly isn't just average or bad. I think it's pretty clear when things are good around Bradford he excels. Not very many QB's are great when everything around them is bad. If we had Adrian Peterson in the backfield I promise you Sam would find receivers a lot more open then they are now.

 

[iced]

Dude, that was amazing and I agree. Bradford will never be a P. Manning, poster child the adaptive QB, but as the team progresses his comfort zone will expand. Maybe there is hope the team will gel to the point that we won't be able to tell the difference. Bradford will make the most over what's there most of the time, but not much more.

And I disagree on Warner, that guy was adaptive. Adaptive QB's can also create what isn't initially there (running or throwing guys open) Bradford doesn't do that, Warner did it on two Super Bowl sleeper teams.

you can't get more adaptive than going from marshall faulk to the worst running attack in the league and still playing lights out.

admittedly he had a few years in between where he was rather average but injuries and ill fitting offenses were the cause of that.

.

I don't think it's that simple.

When Warner started he came into a very comfortable environment. He was surrounded by great players, HOF level players. And he did extremely well.

Then he was pretty bad due to injuries and a lesser supporting cast.

It took him 5 years to get back to his high level.

Remember Warner started 10 games for Az in 2005 and he was pretty average, throwing 11 TDs and 9 INTs with a passer rating of 85. I remember him looking pedestrian in 2005 and the general view was that he wasn't much more than a jag until 2007.

Kurt got his mojo back in 2007 for whatever reasons, health, confidence, comfort level, they are all in the conversation. By that time he was a savvy vet with 2 great WRs in Boldin and Fitz and he lit it up.

Kurt got his glove, that's what it was...