PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft Bradford Please


Pages : 1 [2]

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 11:33 AM
Who glosses over Stafford and Sanchez' question marks?

It's been discussed to death around here.

Bradford - lack of experience in pro-style offense, making reads for himself, taking snaps under center, will need to learn 3, 5 and 7 step drops.

Stafford - inconsistent, questionable decision making, seems to play lights out against weak competition, and struggles against top competition.

Sanchez - only has one year of starting experience.

The two biggest issues I have are people making a big deal out of Bradford's arm and the system he plays in.

Bradford's arm is good. I think it's getting knocked excessively this year because he's being compared to Stafford, and anyone's arm will look weak when you put them next to Stafford. His arm is right there with what Matt Ryan showed last year. His arm strength improved dramatically this year from last, and once he fills out his arm will improve, just like it did for Manning and Brady. Also, pure arm strength is probably the least important aspect of grading a QB prospect, IMO. Bradford has excellent accuracy in the short/medium range, and great poise and pocket presence.

The system argument works on the surface, but if you look closer the system is more of a pro-style spread that has been used by the Pats, Steelers, etc. the last year or so. The NFL has quietly moved to a hybrid spread offense recently, and this is almost exactly the offense Bradford plays in. It's a balanced spread, not a passy-happy spread or a run-happy spread.

The main arguments that I agree with are that he rarely looks off his first or second read, just because he doesn't have to due to the surrounding talent. Also, he doesn't have experience reading a defense in the game and making changes based on what he sees. However, he's an extremely smart guy and no one knows what he could do in that area if given the opportunity. Finally, the talent on OU's offense probably helped make him look better than he is (just like Sanchez), because he had an extra second or two to throw the ball and great skill players to make things happen and get YAC.

L.A. Chieffan
01-10-2009, 11:34 AM
If Detroit was smart theyd grab TEbow before we do

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 11:43 AM
The two biggest issues I have are people making a big deal out of Bradford's arm and the system he plays in.

Bradford's arm is good. I think it's getting knocked excessively this year because he's being compared to Stafford, and anyone's arm will look weak when you put them next to Stafford. His arm is right there with what Matt Ryan showed last year. His arm strength improved dramatically this year from last, and once he fills out his arm will improve, just like it did for Manning and Brady. Also, pure arm strength is probably the least important aspect of grading a QB prospect, IMO. Bradford has excellent accuracy in the short/medium range, and great poise and pocket presence.

The system argument works on the surface, but if you look closer the system is more of a pro-style spread that has been used by the Pats, Steelers, etc. the last year or so. The NFL has quietly moved to a hybrid spread offense recently, and this is almost exactly the offense Bradford plays in. It's a balanced spread, not a passy-happy spread or a run-happy spread.

The main arguments that I agree with are that he rarely looks off his first or second read, just because he doesn't have to due to the surrounding talent. Also, he doesn't have experience reading a defense in the game and making changes based on what he sees. However, he's an extremely smart guy and no one knows what he could do in that area if given the opportunity. Finally, the talent on OU's offense probably helped make him look better than he is (just like Sanchez), because he had an extra second or two to throw the ball and great skill players to make things happen and get YAC.

-We're in total agreement regarding his arm strength. It will be more than sufficient at the NFL level.

-Being in a balanced spread doesn't help his causes considering few teams operate in a system like that, even occasionally. Again, it comes back to footwork and reads, which you cover in your third point.

I'll go one further on the footwork/drops issue: I don't think people are taking this issue as serious as it really is.

People think that a 3, 5, or 7 step drop is just that - a certain amount of steps.

It's much, much more than that. It has to be precise, the timing has to be consistent. There are college QB's that come out every year, who DO play in a pro-system in college, who struggle with the drops they are expected to take in the NFL, and then deliver the ball on time, and on target.

In Bradford's case, he's going to have to learn that basically from scratch, while also learning to make post-snap reads WHILE making that drop.

I'm not saying he won't be able to do it, he will, IMO.

But as I mentioned earlier in this thread, if I'm a GM, I'm hesitant to give a $60M contract to a kid that isn't going to help your team for 2-3 years. He'll need some good coaching at the next level.

milkman
01-10-2009, 11:43 AM
The two biggest issues I have are people making a big deal out of Bradford's arm and the system he plays in.

Bradford's arm is good. I think it's getting knocked excessively this year because he's being compared to Stafford, and anyone's arm will look weak when you put them next to Stafford. His arm is right there with what Matt Ryan showed last year. His arm strength improved dramatically this year from last, and once he fills out his arm will improve, just like it did for Manning and Brady. Also, pure arm strength is probably the least important aspect of grading a QB prospect, IMO. Bradford has excellent accuracy in the short/medium range, and great poise and pocket presence.

The system argument works on the surface, but if you look closer the system is more of a pro-style spread that has been used by the Pats, Steelers, etc. the last year or so. The NFL has quietly moved to a hybrid spread offense recently, and this is almost exactly the offense Bradford plays in. It's a balanced spread, not a passy-happy spread or a run-happy spread.

The main arguments that I agree with are that he rarely looks off his first or second read, just because he doesn't have to due to the surrounding talent. Also, he doesn't have experience reading a defense in the game and making changes based on what he sees. However, he's an extremely smart guy and no one knows what he could do in that area if given the opportunity. Finally, the talent on OU's offense probably helped make him look better than he is (just like Sanchez), because he had an extra second or two to throw the ball and great skill players to make things happen and get YAC.

I'm not sure how you could argue that he has great poise and pocket presence when he played behind a line that gave him such outstanding protection.

Now he showed something in the game against Florida, but that's not a lot to work with to really make an evaluation.

As for Sanchez, he didn't get the same kind of time that Bradford had, and he did show a lot of poise in the face of pressure all year long.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 11:44 AM
I'm not sure how you could argue that he has great poise and pocket presence when he played behind a line that gave him such outstanding protection.

Now he showed something in the game against Florida, but that's not a lot to work with to really make an evaluation.

As for Sanchez, he didn't get the same kind of time that Bradford had, and he did show a lot of poise in the face of pressure all year long.

I'm guessing very few people watched USC this year, Sanchez was pressured and was hit a lot this year, and more often than not, delivered a strike in the face of that pressure.

DaneMcCloud
01-10-2009, 11:49 AM
I'm guessing very few people watched USC this year, Sanchez was pressured and was hit a lot this year, and more often than not, delivered a strike in the face of that pressure.

The overwhelming majority of those begging for Bradford live in Big 12 country. They see Oklahoma almost weekly.

What they didn't see weekly was Matt Stafford and Georgia or Mark Sanchez and USC (much like Matt Ryan last year).

The debate is worthless when the person you're debating doesn't have all of the facts.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 11:51 AM
The overwhelming majority of those begging for Bradford live in Big 12 country. They see Oklahoma almost weekly.

What they didn't see weekly was Matt Stafford and Georgia or Mark Sanchez and USC (much like Matt Ryan last year).

The debate is worthless when the person you're debating doesn't have all of the facts.

Very true. It's also why people go apeshit when a player has a good/bad bowl game, because in most instances, it's the only time they've seen that player.

Luckily, I live in an area that gets an SEC game every week, and the majority of them were Georgia games.

And USC is always on here, for some reason. If the ABC affiliate has a game, it's likely USC.

eazyb81
01-10-2009, 11:54 AM
I'm not sure how you could argue that he has great poise and pocket presence when he played behind a line that gave him such outstanding protection.

Now he showed something in the game against Florida, but that's not a lot to work with to really make an evaluation.

As for Sanchez, he didn't get the same kind of time that Bradford had, and he did show a lot of poise in the face of pressure all year long.

I don't think poise and pocket presence are affected by o-line play. Bradford always knows where he's at, where D-linemen are, and is not scared of holding the ball until the very last second to make that perfect pass. All great QBs have that sixth sense. He really can sense pressure extremely well, but again, we don't know for sure if that confidence will always be with him or if it's due to the star studded o-line.

Sanchez didn't have Bradford's line, but it's still one of the better lines in terms of pure talent in the country. They certainly dominated the majority of Pac 10 opponents they faced. Also, Sanchez has McKnight, Gable, Turner, etc. to dump the ball off too. You don't have to be perfect when you have those guys on your side.

Baby Lee
01-10-2009, 12:52 PM
After eons and eons of discussion ad infinitum on this subject, has NO ONE even countenanced the merits of a good coach versus a blue chipper?
How many blue chippers did Walsh, Bellichik or Holmgren mentor?
Maybe the answer is to put a little more effort into examining the heads on the QBs shoulders, and who will be whispering in their ear day-in/day-out?

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2009, 12:54 PM
After eons and eons of discussion ad infinitum on this subject, has NO ONE even countenanced the merits of a good coach versus a blue chipper?
How many blue chippers did Walsh, Bellichik or Holmgren mentor?
Maybe the answer is to put a little more effort into examining the heads on the QBs shoulders, and who will be whispering in their ear day-in/day-out?

That's (coaching) absolutely an issue, and has been pointed out countless times to the people that think Matt Ryan would be the OROY regardless of where he played.

There are TONS of factors that come into play.

FringeNC
01-10-2009, 01:12 PM
After eons and eons of discussion ad infinitum on this subject, has NO ONE even countenanced the merits of a good coach versus a blue chipper?
How many blue chippers did Walsh, Bellichik or Holmgren mentor?
Maybe the answer is to put a little more effort into examining the heads on the QBs shoulders, and who will be whispering in their ear day-in/day-out?

I definitely think there is way too much emphasis in these QB threads put on physical tools. Tom Brady does not have dominant physical tools. Neither does Peyton Manning. Neither does Drew Brees. JaMarcus Russell does.

This so reminds me of the scouts vs. moneyballers in baseball. The scouts drool over "tools", whereas the moneyballers are concerned with trivial things like can the guy play baseball and does he know the strike zone?

bowener
01-10-2009, 01:44 PM
Tebow

SportsRacer and I must be fucking cosmic power soultwins or some shit cuz we on the same waves man!!

TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow
TebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebowTebow

Didn't you fuckers watch 1 minute of ESPN yesterday?

I honestly thought that for a moment Tebow was Jesus, and he saved the fucking world from a killer asteroid, or maybe a marauding horde of dastardly space Tyrannosaurus Rexi... is Rexi the plural for Rex? Rexes just doesnt seem right, so I am going with Rexi.

Also, he can count to infinity, twice.
Leaps small buildings....
Google asks him for information when it doesn't know.....
Shits cancer curing teddy bears
Killed all other gods except his God.

Darth CarlSatan
01-10-2009, 01:46 PM
Yes, let's complete the Triad Of Douchebaggery by drafting our very own Cutler/Rivers with a God Complex.

yay.

dorseybowe
01-10-2009, 02:01 PM
Bradford is bigger than I thought he was, and his completion percentage is phenomenal.

DaneMcCloud
01-10-2009, 02:10 PM
Yes, let's complete the Triad Of Douchebaggery by drafting our very own Cutler/Rivers with a God Complex.

yay.

God loves winners

jAZ
03-29-2010, 05:50 PM
I don't think he's coming out, but he's my choice in the QB dice-roll.

nah

ROFL

This is going to go well....

Please tell me your just making that up?

Tebow

Reesing

Chase McDanielson

Uh Bradford NO!

Hell no to bradford

TIM TEBOW!!!!!!

The search function is funny.

Mecca
03-29-2010, 05:57 PM
Is it funny because in that class he's still the 3rd QB.

Count Zarth
03-29-2010, 05:58 PM
jAZ, stay in DC. How many times do I have to tell you?

Mr. Laz
03-29-2010, 08:31 PM
Don't you know that's the mark of a good pro quarterback.

The ability to get gangraped and make mediocre throws is what separates the true prospects from guys that need 3 seconds to make perfect throws (mere system QBs of course).

Bradford should stay, so he can show all the scouts that he knows how to make off balanced throws while running for his life, that's what you need in an NFL QB these days.how'd that turn out for him?

Mecca
03-29-2010, 08:40 PM
It worked out well because apparently the NFL doesn't care that he got injured, he's going higher than he would have last year.

Odd yet true.

RippedmyFlesh
03-29-2010, 09:23 PM
It worked out well because apparently the NFL doesn't care that he got injured, he's going higher than he would have last year.

Odd yet true.
may have been 3rd qb picked last year and a good chance to be 1st qb picked this year.
after an injury
staying at school made him a boatload of cash
you don't see it happen that way often

Mecca
03-29-2010, 09:30 PM
Gresham going back cost himself money, yet somehow Bradford didn't.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-29-2010, 09:53 PM
Gresham going back cost himself money, yet somehow Bradford didn't.

Teams don't want to pay anyone who is not a QB top overall money with this salary structure in place.

Vick
Carr
Palmer
Manning
Smith
Williams
Russell
Long
Stafford
Bradford

8/10 top overall picks of the last decade will have been QBs

RippedmyFlesh
03-29-2010, 10:20 PM
Gresham going back cost himself money, yet somehow Bradford didn't.

this years qb class is so much weaker than last year's top heavy class

patteeu
03-30-2010, 05:32 AM
may have been 3rd qb picked last year and a good chance to be 1st qb picked this year.
after an injury
staying at school made him a boatload of cash
you don't see it happen that way often

Technically, you see it happen all the time.

BigCatDaddy
03-30-2010, 06:52 AM
this years qb class is so much weaker than last year's top heavy class


Top Heavy? LMAO How did that class stack up the prior years class?

58-4ever
03-30-2010, 08:27 AM
You could really tell yesterday that Bradford has put on 15-20 pounds of muscle. I think he is going to be a very good pro QB.

jAZ
09-13-2010, 05:08 PM
bump.

jAZ
02-05-2011, 01:47 PM
itty-bump

DeezNutz
02-05-2011, 01:59 PM
Yes, let's complete the Triad Of Douchebaggery by drafting our very own Cutler/Rivers with a God Complex.

yay.

Wut, ROR? This would definitely suck.

BigCatDaddy
02-05-2011, 02:11 PM
Much fail in the QB evaluating skills in this thread.

-King-
02-05-2011, 02:34 PM
Wut, ROR? This would definitely suck.


Well...its ROR...what do you expect?
Posted via Mobile Device

Sure-Oz
02-05-2011, 02:45 PM
I'll admit i didnt think bradford was gonna do crap, hell of a rookie year

Rams Fan
02-05-2011, 02:45 PM
HATAS GONNA HATE.

Keep on doubting Sam ******* Bradford.

Bugeater
02-05-2011, 02:55 PM
And the point of this bump was....?

'Hamas' Jenkins
02-05-2011, 02:57 PM
He's much better than I thought he'd be, but people are really overrating his year. You can't bash Cassel, Sanchez, or anyone else for dumping off and legitimately praise Bradford in the same breath.

That said, if he stays healthy, he looks to be a very good QB down the road, possible top 5 material. The Rams protected him very well this year while still giving him experience.

Rams Fan
02-05-2011, 02:59 PM
He's much better than I thought he'd be, but people are really overrating his year. You can't bash Cassel, Sanchez, or anyone else for dumping off and legitimately praise Bradford in the same breath.

That said, if he stays healthy, he looks to be a very good QB down the road, possible top 5 material. The Rams protected him very well this year while still giving him experience.

I agree mostly with this post, but look at the WRs he had. All of them were either UDFAs or WRs drafted in the 4th round or lower(excluding Avery and Clayton). The Rams need a legit #1 WR badly. And I'm curious how he'll adjust to changing systems.

BigCatDaddy
02-05-2011, 03:03 PM
I agree mostly with this post, but look at the WRs he had. All of them were either UDFAs or WRs drafted in the 4th round or lower(excluding Avery and Clayton). The Rams need a legit #1 WR badly. And I'm curious how he'll adjust to changing systems.

They could use a #1, #2, and #3WR badly and probably a new RB with some wheels.

Rams Fan
02-05-2011, 03:06 PM
They could use a #1, #2, and #3WR badly and probably a new RB with some wheels.

Eh, I disagree. Avery/Clayton could be an okay #2 with Amendola out of the slot. I agree they need another RB and I'd be shocked if they didn't draft one by the 5th round.

Bwana
02-05-2011, 03:12 PM
itty-bump

itty-bump

Gee jAZ, who knew you were flexible enough to suck your own cock. :holdman:

Deberg_1990
02-05-2011, 03:15 PM
Maybe we can get a really good QB like Mark Sanchez in the 2nd, pick up another draft pick in an LJ trade and get a playmaker like Orakpo, Curry, Maulauga, or Crabtree with our first round pick. Bring in Rich Gannon as a QB coach and let him tutor Thigpen, bring in another FA QB but don't use the highest pick we've had on a position we already have potential in. Sorry if this is a duplicate opinion...i'm new here and am still figuring this out.

ROFL

Threads like these are always comedy gold.