Surprise rival for seahawks...

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. RATING: PG-13
Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 7:33 am
  • I don't think AZ is quite up to the top of the NFCW level yet, but they signed Winston today. I really think they will surprise some people. Their Oline will be immensely better than last year (how could it not?). Winston, Cooper are going to be big upgrades allowing them to shuffle the other guys around. Palmer is so much better than Skelton/Kolb/Lindley that I'd argue it's like going from TJack to RW. Palmer isn't that good, but those other guys are just that bad. I really think they could possibly end up 7-9 or 8-8 even if they sneak up on some teams early.

    So not a top rival, but they could be a lot better than everyone thinks this year.
    User avatar
    EverydayImRusselin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 769
    Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:38 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 7:34 am
  • I'd also add Bulger doesn't have a progeria head (even though he was from West Virginia).

    Les, Mark, Mods, please make Avenger Ram our "Token Ram" guy. I like the cut of his jib.
    User avatar
    pehawk
    * Report Button *
     
    Posts: 9925
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:08 pm


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 7:55 am
  • Seems our opinions vary from that of 9er fans. Grabbed a link of a thread titled "Hawks and Rams over rated" on the webzone. pages of fun. Not every post is retarded but by in large the inmates are running the assylum.

    http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/1 ... overrated/
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2940
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:00 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:Image

    The Rams are not a threat...

    You have nothing to worry about...

    Take them lightly...
    Don't gameplan...

    Rest your starters...

    The Rams are not a threat...


    As if that's going to wo-o-r-r--- :zzzzz:

    J/K....you might lull some fans to sleep, but Dangeruss doesn't sleep, he just re-charges. :)

    BTW, Welcome back! Gonna be a :duel: this year.
    Talent can get you to the playoffs.
    It takes character to win when you get there.

    SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS
    User avatar
    sutz
    USMC 1970-77
     
    Posts: 9977
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:00 am
  • Rich, that thread reads like an example of why people should donate money toward research to cure Down syndrome.
    Rams bet status: honored. Bradford still sucks.
    RedAlice is right.
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24626
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:01 am
  • RichNhansom wrote:Seems our opinions vary from that of 9er fans. Grabbed a link of a thread titled "Hawks and Rams over rated" on the webzone. pages of fun. Not every post is retarded but by in large the inmates are running the assylum.

    http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/1 ... overrated/


    And by "inmates" you mean minorities, right? Clever.

    I must admit its getting harder to pinpoint all of the racism you guys spew. Its hard work, but I remain dedicated to the cause.
    User avatar
    pehawk
    * Report Button *
     
    Posts: 9925
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:08 pm


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:19 am
  • One hit from Browner or Chancellor and we'll see how effective those little rookies are. Going to get a rude welcome to the NFL courtesy of the legion of boom.
    Stephen SeaHawking
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 254
    Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 2:21 pm


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:36 am
  • I do think the Rams are on a serious upswing. This year, I think they will unfortunately be victims of being in the hardest division in football.
    User avatar
    ChiefHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 369
    Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:08 am
    Location: Auburn, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:37 am
  • pehawk wrote:
    RichNhansom wrote:Seems our opinions vary from that of 9er fans. Grabbed a link of a thread titled "Hawks and Rams over rated" on the webzone. pages of fun. Not every post is retarded but by in large the inmates are running the assylum.

    http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/1 ... overrated/


    And by "inmates" you mean minorities, right? Clever.

    I must admit its getting harder to pinpoint all of the racism you guys spew. Its hard work, but I remain dedicated to the cause.


    Huh? Well the majority of that fan base rides the short bus so not sure what you mean.
    Hopefully you just missed the sarcasm button.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2940
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:41 am
  • I give Rams 1% chance on winning against Hawks. This year is going to be last year we see Bradford as their starter.
    Image
    User avatar
    MANUNITED23
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1877
    Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 5:27 pm
    Location: Bay Area, CA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:45 am
  • Just want to point out that Bailey is not going to be one of our starters. He will probably start this year as our #5 behind Austin, Givens, Pettis and Quick. So really we are just relying on one rookie wr to contribute a lot and that is of course Austin.
    User avatar
    Fitz the Ram
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 100
    Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:21 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:49 am
  • MANUNITED23 wrote:I give Rams 1% chance on winning against Hawks. This year is going to be last year we see Bradford as their starter.


    ...Thankfully the Seahawks won't be underestimating the Rams that much. We nearly lost to them in OUR house last year. Bradford scares nobody, but their defense gave us all kinds of fits.
    Rams bet status: honored. Bradford still sucks.
    RedAlice is right.
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24626
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:53 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:QB1: 138-214 (64.5%), 1,826 yards, 14 TDs, 6 Ints., 101.5 passer rating, W/L: 6-1 (.857)
    QB2: 136-218 (62.4%), 1,814 yards, 10 TDs, 3 Ints., 98.3 passer rating, W/L: 5-2 (.714)

    I think we can agree that these are pretty comparable stats. However, while QB1 received a fair amount of attention, QB2 was treated like a future Hall of Famer.

    QB1: Marc Bulger
    QB2: Colin Kaepernick

    Feel free to quote these stats to any Whiner fan who tells you that Kaepernick is a Top 10 QB in the NFL after seven starts.


    Thanks, Avenger. I'll keep that one in my back pocket. It's been a lot of beers ago, so I don't fully recall, which weapons were still around from the "GSoT" for Bulger? Holt? Bruce? Faulk? I suppose that would be the 1st line of excuses for 9er fans, followed by a comparison of rushing yards for each QB.

    Speaking of receiving weapons, I could see the Rams gaining on, or possibly outproducing, the 9ers this year. When the Seahawks' 5th/6th string WR castoff enters the 9ers' camp in a battle for the #2 WR spot opposite Anquan Boldin, their passing game doesn't seem so scary.
    Image
    User avatar
    HawkAroundTheClock
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1444
    Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:30 pm
    Location: Olympia


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:54 am
  • I think the Rams are being heavily overrated this year. Mainly because a continuously mediocre team had some good games against the division last year. And they really expect Fisher to be able to make the 2010 Rookie of the Year be what everyone hoped he would be. But lets face it. The excuses for Bradford are running up short. You can only blame everyone else for so long.

    This teams needs a better QB and then they can excel.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:57 am
  • HawkAroundTheClock wrote:
    AvengerRam wrote:QB1: 138-214 (64.5%), 1,826 yards, 14 TDs, 6 Ints., 101.5 passer rating, W/L: 6-1 (.857)
    QB2: 136-218 (62.4%), 1,814 yards, 10 TDs, 3 Ints., 98.3 passer rating, W/L: 5-2 (.714)

    I think we can agree that these are pretty comparable stats. However, while QB1 received a fair amount of attention, QB2 was treated like a future Hall of Famer.

    QB1: Marc Bulger
    QB2: Colin Kaepernick

    Feel free to quote these stats to any Whiner fan who tells you that Kaepernick is a Top 10 QB in the NFL after seven starts.


    Thanks, Avenger. I'll keep that one in my back pocket. It's been a lot of beers ago, so I don't fully recall, which weapons were still around from the "GSoT" for Bulger? Holt? Bruce? Faulk? I suppose that would be the 1st line of excuses for 9er fans, followed by a comparison of rushing yards for each QB.


    The Rams still had great weapons, no doubt (though Faulk was starting to slow down due to knee issues). However, a good counter to that is that Alex Smith had a 100+ passer rating before Kaepernick took over last year, so its not like he was plugged into a bad offense.
    User avatar
    AvengerRam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 461
    Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:01 am
  • Cartire wrote:I think the Rams are being heavily overrated this year. Mainly because a continuously mediocre team had some good games against the division last year. And they really expect Fisher to be able to make the 2010 Rookie of the Year be what everyone hoped he would be. But lets face it. The excuses for Bradford are running up short. You can only blame everyone else for so long.

    This teams needs a better QB and then they can excel.


    In his first three years, Bradford had 3 offensive coordinators, a turnstile of an offensive line, and a group of WRs who (apart from Danny Amendola, who was injured half the time) was sub-par, at best. Those are facts, not excuses.

    This year, he will have continuity in the scheme, a bolstered O line, and a group of WRs (and TE) who, though unproven, are talented.

    If Sam's numbers don't reflect these factors, he will be rightfully criticized.

    I wouldn't be so quick to bet against him, if I were you, though.
    User avatar
    AvengerRam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 461
    Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:03 am
  • Wilson played football at a high level for 3 different teams in 3 years, from college to the NFL, and look what he did. Bradford is a bust as a #1 overall. Whether he can ever win a playoff game is debatable. Rams should draft a QB high next year.
    Rams bet status: honored. Bradford still sucks.
    RedAlice is right.
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24626
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:06 am
  • RolandDeschain wrote:Wilson played football at a high level for 3 different teams in 3 years, from college to the NFL, and look what he did. Bradford is a bust as a #1 overall. Whether he can ever win a playoff game is debatable. Rams should draft a QB high next year.


    That's nonsense. First of all, Wilson's college success is irrelevant to the discussion.

    As for Sam, if you look at his numbers, they are comparable to guys like Drew Brees and Eli Manning early in their careers. There's no guarantee that he will progress like they did, but to write him off and declare that the Rams will be replacing him next year is just plain silly.
    User avatar
    AvengerRam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 461
    Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:11 am
  • RichNhansom wrote:
    pehawk wrote:
    RichNhansom wrote:Seems our opinions vary from that of 9er fans. Grabbed a link of a thread titled "Hawks and Rams over rated" on the webzone. pages of fun. Not every post is retarded but by in large the inmates are running the assylum.

    http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/1 ... overrated/


    And by "inmates" you mean minorities, right? Clever.

    I must admit its getting harder to pinpoint all of the racism you guys spew. Its hard work, but I remain dedicated to the cause.


    There's nothing funny about racism. Really.

    I do love the thread you linked us to though. Good stuff, hermano.
    Last edited by pehawk on Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    pehawk
    * Report Button *
     
    Posts: 9925
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:08 pm


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:18 am
  • Don't know why people on this board underrate Bradford so much. Avenger is dead on about him, much as I hate agreeing with the enemy. It's an honest evaluation.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4550
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:19 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:
    Cartire wrote:I think the Rams are being heavily overrated this year. Mainly because a continuously mediocre team had some good games against the division last year. And they really expect Fisher to be able to make the 2010 Rookie of the Year be what everyone hoped he would be. But lets face it. The excuses for Bradford are running up short. You can only blame everyone else for so long.

    This teams needs a better QB and then they can excel.


    In his first three years, Bradford had 3 offensive coordinators, a turnstile of an offensive line, and a group of WRs who (apart from Danny Amendola, who was injured half the time) was sub-par, at best. Those are facts, not excuses.

    This year, he will have continuity in the scheme, a bolstered O line, and a group of WRs (and TE) who, though unproven, are talented.

    If Sam's numbers don't reflect these factors, he will be rightfully criticized.

    I wouldn't be so quick to bet against him, if I were you, though.


    Those are facts that you stated, but the excuse is that those facts are the reason that bradford has been mediocre. Correlation is not directly related to causation. When I say the excuses are running thin. They are. Because unless he does have a great season this year, those excuses can no longer be used.

    And sub-par WR's can easily be attributed to sub-par QB play. If bradford had been better the last 2 years, this in direct relation, the WR's would have been better as well. And that couldnt be an excuse.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:35 am
  • Cartire wrote:
    AvengerRam wrote:
    Cartire wrote:I think the Rams are being heavily overrated this year. Mainly because a continuously mediocre team had some good games against the division last year. And they really expect Fisher to be able to make the 2010 Rookie of the Year be what everyone hoped he would be. But lets face it. The excuses for Bradford are running up short. You can only blame everyone else for so long.

    This teams needs a better QB and then they can excel.


    In his first three years, Bradford had 3 offensive coordinators, a turnstile of an offensive line, and a group of WRs who (apart from Danny Amendola, who was injured half the time) was sub-par, at best. Those are facts, not excuses.

    This year, he will have continuity in the scheme, a bolstered O line, and a group of WRs (and TE) who, though unproven, are talented.

    If Sam's numbers don't reflect these factors, he will be rightfully criticized.

    I wouldn't be so quick to bet against him, if I were you, though.


    Those are facts that you stated, but the excuse is that those facts are the reason that bradford has been mediocre. Correlation is not directly related to causation. When I say the excuses are running thin. They are. Because unless he does have a great season this year, those excuses can no longer be used.

    And sub-par WR's can easily be attributed to sub-par QB play. If bradford had been better the last 2 years, this in direct relation, the WR's would have been better as well. And that couldnt be an excuse.


    Avenger didn't use any excuses for Bradford this year. Exactly the opposite.

    Now that you've added the typical Bradford debate, this is a real Rams' discussion. Haha.



    Here is the link for the Amendola TD requested above:

    http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... plays-4150
    Los Angeles Rams' fan who lives in San Diego.
    User avatar
    RedAlice
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 596
    Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:47 am
    Location: San Diego


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:47 am
  • "Surprise rival?" I still hate the Rams with a passion and never stopped. I remember 2004.
    "He's a *****. It's not that he was a *****, he is a *****, and that's why he hasn't won anything."
    User avatar
    Smelly McUgly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3601
    Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:30 pm
    Location: God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwest


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:50 am
  • RedAlice wrote:Here is the link for the Amendola TD requested above:

    http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... plays-4150


    Good link, but I think the comment was about seeing how Amendola slipped out of the huddle and whatnot to get to the corner in the first place.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 14632
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:51 am
  • Avenger, I agree that college success is basically irrelevant to the NFL. What I meant was, using "oh, he has had a new offense every year" isn't a full-on legitimate excuse for mediocre play.

    Here, let's look at Football Outsiders rankings for the first 3 years of the careers of the guys you mentioned.

    Eli: 32nd (of 42), 9th (of 46), and 13th (of 46).
    Brees: Not enough passes in the season to be ranked in his rookie year. 2nd/3rd/4th are as follows: 21st (of 47), 40th (of 47), and 7th (of 42).
    Bradford: 39th (of 46), 43rd (of 47), and 16th (of 39).

    He did have his best year in 2012, obviously; but you want to know why I'm still not sold on Bradford? Even when he had statistically good games, he didn't really look good. I just looked at Pro Football Focus's grades for him for 2012, and that would seem to back my assertion. He had a negative grade for 8 of his 16 games. If you think he's going to turn into an elite QB because he showed improvement in his 3rd year, keep dreaming. PFF only goes back to 2008, when they started the site, so I can't check the first 3 years of Brees or Eli, unfortunately. However, I did just look at all the 2012 starting QBs on there to count how many games they had where they had a negative grade, and Bradford had 8. Half of his games had a negative grade for him; and PFF doesn't penalize QBs for bad O-lines, and they even remote interceptions that bounce off of the hands of WRs, etc. It's a fairly good indicator of how a QB actually played. Here are the other QBs with 8 or more games that had negative grades in the regular season last year:

    Dalton, Palmer, Cutler, Freeman, and Sanchez also had 8. Weeden and Fitzpatrick had 9. Ponder was by far the worst, with 12.

    Not exactly great company. We'll see what happens with Bradford this year, but you should definitely be in "if he doesn't show definite improvement this year over last year, I want some real competition in camp next year to have a chance at winning the job over him" mode, in my opinion.
    Rams bet status: honored. Bradford still sucks.
    RedAlice is right.
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24626
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:55 am
  • I think Bradford is the real deal too. Even thought he's a Lamb
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2683
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:57 am
  • I think if he doesn't show significant improvement this year then a new QB will be drafted high.

    Fisher doesn't seem like he is just going to hope here.
    Los Angeles Rams' fan who lives in San Diego.
    User avatar
    RedAlice
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 596
    Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:47 am
    Location: San Diego


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:04 am
  • RolandDeschain wrote:Avenger, I agree that college success is basically irrelevant to the NFL. What I meant was, using "oh, he has had a new offense every year" isn't a full-on legitimate excuse for mediocre play.

    Here, let's look at Football Outsiders rankings for the first 3 years of the careers of the guys you mentioned.

    Eli: 32nd (of 42), 9th (of 46), and 13th (of 46).
    Brees: Not enough passes in the season to be ranked in his rookie year. 2nd/3rd/4th are as follows: 21st (of 47), 40th (of 47), and 7th (of 42).
    Bradford: 39th (of 46), 43rd (of 47), and 16th (of 39).

    He did have his best year in 2012, obviously; but you want to know why I'm still not sold on Bradford? Even when he had statistically good games, he didn't really look good. I just looked at Pro Football Focus's grades for him for 2012, and that would seem to back my assertion. He had a negative grade for 8 of his 16 games. If you think he's going to turn into an elite QB because he showed improvement in his 3rd year, keep dreaming. PFF only goes back to 2008, when they started the site, so I can't check the first 3 years of Brees or Eli, unfortunately. However, I did just look at all the 2012 starting QBs on there to count how many games they had where they had a negative grade, and Bradford had 8. Half of his games had a negative grade for him; and PFF doesn't penalize QBs for bad O-lines, and they even remote interceptions that bounce off of the hands of WRs, etc. It's a fairly good indicator of how a QB actually played. Here are the other QBs with 8 or more games that had negative grades in the regular season last year:

    Dalton, Palmer, Cutler, Freeman, and Sanchez also had 8. Weeden and Fitzpatrick had 9. Ponder was by far the worst, with 12.

    Not exactly great company. We'll see what happens with Bradford this year, but you should definitely be in "if he doesn't show definite improvement this year over last year, I want some real competition in camp next year to have a chance at winning the job over him" mode, in my opinion.


    Don't get me started on PFF. I'll just say briefly that, by presenting their subjective opinions through numerical scores, they've convinced a lot of people that their analysis is scientific and objective, which it clearly is not.

    I don't think you can overestimate the adversity Bradford has faced. He has been hit at an astonishing rate due to a porous O Line and receivers who could not get open. A lot of QBs would not have survived under those circumstances.

    My expectation for him this year is a passer rating above 90. If the offense stays relatively healthy and he can't achieve that mark, I'd be concerned.

    I think that his real "breakout year," though, is likely to be 2014, when the WR corps has matured and the pieces start coming together as a unit.

    Don't forget, though Sam has been in the league for 3 years, he's only a year older than Wilson, and he's actually younger than Kaepernick.
    User avatar
    AvengerRam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 461
    Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:08 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:
    Don't get me started on PFF. I'll just say briefly that, by presenting their subjective opinions through numerical scores, they've convinced a lot of people that their analysis is scientific and objective, which it clearly is not.



    Lets be completely honest now. People who dont agree with PFF's rating system usually have a team or player they like being rated low. If you actually read through their "subjective" break down of their different formulas, you'll see how little subjectiveness is actually integrated into it.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:11 am
  • Cartire wrote:
    AvengerRam wrote:
    Don't get me started on PFF. I'll just say briefly that, by presenting their subjective opinions through numerical scores, they've convinced a lot of people that their analysis is scientific and objective, which it clearly is not.



    Lets be completely honest now. People who dont agree with PFF's rating system usually have a team or player they like being rated low. If you actually read through their "subjective" break down of their different formulas, you'll see how little subjectiveness is actually integrated into it.


    No, they have rated certain Rams players (i.e. CBs) much higher than their actual play warranted. I think all of these combined objective/subjective analyses (I'd also include ESPN's "Total QBR") are pretty worthless.
    User avatar
    AvengerRam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 461
    Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:14 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:
    Cartire wrote:
    AvengerRam wrote:
    Don't get me started on PFF. I'll just say briefly that, by presenting their subjective opinions through numerical scores, they've convinced a lot of people that their analysis is scientific and objective, which it clearly is not.



    Lets be completely honest now. People who dont agree with PFF's rating system usually have a team or player they like being rated low. If you actually read through their "subjective" break down of their different formulas, you'll see how little subjectiveness is actually integrated into it.


    No, they have rated certain Rams players (i.e. CBs) much higher than their actual play warranted. I think all of these combined objective/subjective analyses (I'd also include ESPN's "Total QBR") are pretty worthless.


    Or was their play right where they were rated. And you as a fan dont breakdown the all-22 and just assume when they botch a few calls, they are less then they really are?
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:14 am
  • The Rams are indeed an "up & coming" force in the NFC-West. I really, really wanted the Seahawks to draft Steadman Bailey (who didn't go until the Rams second 3-rd round pick). Many assume that Bailey is a slot receiver due to his size however he was Mr Outside to Austin's Mr Inside. Statistically, Bailey was head and shoulders above nearly all of the other receivers in the draft and has been described as a Greg Jennings clone. Many said he was the "most ready to start" of any of the WR's in the draft. I think he will vastly outperform Austin as a WR this year, while Austin will make a great kick returner this year (and is actually a raw, developmental WR with speed and a positive upside).

    ""Bailey outproduced more ballyhooed teammate Tavon Austin in the West Virginia passing game, tallying 186 receptions for 2,901 yards (15.6 YPR) and 37 touchdowns over his final two seasons. Of Bailey's 148 targets, 72 went for a first down or touchdown in 2012, the highest rate among draft-eligible receivers. Bailey atones for his smallish stature and mediocre speed (4.52 forty) with technically sound routes and red-zone instincts. He was Geno Smith's go-to receiver in scoring position. The two Mountaineer receivers complement each other very well, and the Rams receiving group is one of the youngest in the league.""
    http://www.rotoworld.com/player/CFB/130 ... man-Bailey

    ""The 2012 second team All-American had the stats to turn heads. Bailey's 113 catches, 1,627 yards and 25 TDs last year were remarkable, but his size turned off NFL scouts. Which is odd since Tavon Austin is two inches shorter than Bailey's 5'10". In 2006, another "short" receiver was taken, only he went in the second round. His name is Greg Jennings, and he went on to prove solid route running and glue like hands means more than a few inches in height"".
    http://www.turfshowtimes.com/2013/5/6/4 ... -nfl-draft

    IMO: Steadman Bailey will be one to watch, Austin, not so much.
    <--><--><--><--><--><--><--><--><--> GO SEAHAWKS <--><--><--><--><--><--><--><--><-->
    User avatar
    CamanoIslandJQ
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 907
    Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:11 am
    Location: Camano Island, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:18 am
  • Sarlacc83 wrote:
    RedAlice wrote:Here is the link for the Amendola TD requested above:

    http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... plays-4150


    Good link, but I think the comment was about seeing how Amendola slipped out of the huddle and whatnot to get to the corner in the first place.


    He never left the field after the previous snap and just hung out there on the sideline. The field goal unit came out and he was still there on the field from the previous play.

    It's the same thing Crabtree and Akers did agains the Rams the previous year.

    "Crabtree pretended he was leaving the field before stopping a couple of yards shy of the 49ers' sideline. Kicker David Akers then lined up to try a field goal, took a direct snap and chucked a 14-yard touchdown pass to an uncovered Crabtree."

    http://www.timesheraldonline.com/sports/ci_19659447
    Los Angeles Rams' fan who lives in San Diego.
    User avatar
    RedAlice
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 596
    Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:47 am
    Location: San Diego


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:21 am
  • Cartire wrote:
    Or was their play right where they were rated. And you as a fan dont breakdown the all-22 and just assume when they botch a few calls, they are less then they really are?


    I really don't want to debate this issue and, in doing so, derail this thread.

    Suffice to say, I have no problem with analysts giving a subjective evaluation based upon their observations and review of game film. I do have a problem when they assign numbers to those subjective views and publish them as if they are statistics.

    So, whether PFF favors the Rams or not, I'm not a fan.
    User avatar
    AvengerRam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 461
    Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:25 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:
    Cartire wrote:
    Or was their play right where they were rated. And you as a fan dont breakdown the all-22 and just assume when they botch a few calls, they are less then they really are?


    I really don't want to debate this issue and, in doing so, derail this thread.

    Suffice to say, I have no problem with analysts giving a subjective evaluation based upon their observations and review of game film. I do have a problem when they assign numbers to those subjective views and publish them as if they are statistics.

    So, whether PFF favors the Rams or not, I'm not a fan.


    I know you dont want a debate. But the numbers arent subjective. Thats what im trying to explain. They are not an analysis's viewpoint assigning a number. Thats what ESPN and NFL do with top 10 rankings. Just read the formulas and you will see they are not subjective. Just cause you say they are subjective doesnt make it true.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:26 am
  • I've read them. They're subjective. Move on.
    User avatar
    AvengerRam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 461
    Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:30 am
  • Eh, you're both right. They are subjective to a degree (how does ESPN figure that a QB should always take the statistical hit for taking a sack). However, only the weighting of the metrics used is subjective. They are at least based on actual statistical evidence. It's not like PFF changes or omits the actual statistical evidence itself.

    Some people do have a problem with PFF's weighting and prefer FO and vice versa. Personally, I'm okay with using PFF because their formulas make generally good sense and, when taken in league with other formulas from FO and the words of experts like Greg Cosell, they tend to hold up well.

    So, use a pattern of evidence rather than relying on just one metric, is what I would say.
    "He's a *****. It's not that he was a *****, he is a *****, and that's why he hasn't won anything."
    User avatar
    Smelly McUgly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3601
    Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:30 pm
    Location: God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwest


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:39 am
  • vanillasuede wrote:Jake - you are exactly right and forget about the rookies even though by the end of the year they will be contributing in droves. The 2 guys to worry about are Chris Givens and Jared Cook - After that Brian Quick and Pettis who all have experience and then you throw in the quick slot 4.3 WR speedsters Tavon Austin and Stedman.

    Add in the fact they upgraded their OL with Jake Long and the center/guard from Alabama and now you have weapons with time for a very accurate Sam Bradford to throw the ball too.

    Now with the defense they added a stud LB in Ogletree (who runs like a deer to hunt down QBs) in the first round and McDonald at safety to go with that unreal DL that led the league in sacks last year. Long an Quinn are unreal.

    S.F. has issues at WR and DL - I think by mid season the Rams are going to be a force and better than SF.

    Take them lightly and you will get destroyed. They were 4-1-1 in the division last year.

    And to think they have 2 first round picks in 2014 and 2 more in 2015. This division is going to be unbelievably tough.

    Just one man's opinion.

    Pretty conincing. I'm glad they have those picks, though, instead of what they traded away.
    SEAHAWKS CAN EXPLOIT TIGHT PASS DEFENSE RULES
    http://cover32.com/seahawks/2014/08/20/ ... crutiny/1/
    Follow me on Twitter: @George_OGorman
    User avatar
    Lords of Scythia
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1317
    Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:32 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:44 am
  • Lords of Scythia wrote:
    vanillasuede wrote:
    And to think they have 2 first round picks in 2014 and 2 more in 2015. This division is going to be unbelievably tough.

    Just one man's opinion.

    Pretty conincing. I'm glad they have those picks, though, instead of what they traded away.


    Rams have the Skins' Round 1 pick in 2014. They do not have it in 2015.
    Los Angeles Rams' fan who lives in San Diego.
    User avatar
    RedAlice
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 596
    Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:47 am
    Location: San Diego


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:50 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:I've read them. They're subjective. Move on.


    I want to apologize to you. This whole time, I thought we were talking about Football Outsiders Formulas and not ProFootballFocus. I dont know why I had that in my head but I did, and thusly why I was trying to defend it.

    You are correct, PFF is subjective and analytical.

    I stand corrected.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:55 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:Wilson played football at a high level for 3 different teams in 3 years, from college to the NFL, and look what he did. Bradford is a bust as a #1 overall. Whether he can ever win a playoff game is debatable. Rams should draft a QB high next year.


    That's nonsense. First of all, Wilson's college success is irrelevant to the discussion.

    As for Sam, if you look at his numbers, they are comparable to guys like Drew Brees and Eli Manning early in their careers. There's no guarantee that he will progress like they did, but to write him off and declare that the Rams will be replacing him next year is just plain silly.

    Whoa, whoa, whoa there. Now, I sorta like your contributions in here like others have already said. (You even mentioned you don't mean to derail the thread. That did not go unnoticed. When have we ever heard a Niner fan say that when talking about CK?) Just remember - put a post it note on next to your screen if you need to... "Thou shalt not use the term "irrelevant" and Russell Wilson EVER in the same sentence!" He's ALWAYS relevant. ;)

    btw, the 3 years included a year in the NFL with the Seahawks, so... it really was a point well made and honestly relevant to that part of the discussion. I didn't take it like it was said to completely trump the argument you're making... but, it was worth noting in comparison when the point was made that Bradford has dealt with turnstile coaches.

    I don't think Bradford is a bust... for what it's worth. But, hopefully the Hawks make it look that way this year!

    :D
    World Champion
    Image
    Seattle Seahawks
    User avatar
    TeamoftheCentury
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 904
    Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:54 am
    Location: Orlando, FL


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:18 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:I don't think you can overestimate the adversity Bradford has faced. He has been hit at an astonishing rate due to a porous O Line and receivers who could not get open. A lot of QBs would not have survived under those circumstances.

    Ok, now you're just sounding like a blind homer. Football Outsiders ranked O-line pass protection for the Rams at 13th in the league. Seahawks at 20th. ROOKIE QB Russell Wilson took 33 sacks behind the 20th-ranked line, and 3rd-year Bradford took 35 behind the 13th-ranked line.

    AvengerRam wrote:My expectation for him this year is a passer rating above 90. If the offense stays relatively healthy and he can't achieve that mark, I'd be concerned.

    Well, you're very likely to become concerned, then. He may still improve by a good margin, but I don't think it's more likely than not.

    AvengerRam wrote:Don't forget, though Sam has been in the league for 3 years, he's only a year older than Wilson, and he's actually younger than Kaepernick.

    Bradford choosing to enter the NFL early isn't an excuse to delay growth once he's in the National Football League.
    Rams bet status: honored. Bradford still sucks.
    RedAlice is right.
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24626
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:27 am
  • Anyone who thinks the Rams were the 13th best pass protecting team in the league last year needs to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new analysis.
    User avatar
    AvengerRam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 461
    Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:38 am
  • AvengerRam wrote:Anyone who thinks the Rams were the 13th best pass protecting team in the league last year needs to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new analysis.


    Yeah, it's much more likely that the guys at Football Outsiders don't know what they're doing with their line analysis than you. (Also, 13th isn't good, just the upper end of mediocre or average.)

    :roll:
    Rams bet status: honored. Bradford still sucks.
    RedAlice is right.
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24626
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:39 am
  • Underestimate Sam if you want. I think you'll find it was misplaced.

    Looks like you guys have more important things to talk about with the report on Harvin, so I'll say so long for now.
    User avatar
    AvengerRam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 461
    Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:39 am
  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    AvengerRam wrote:Anyone who thinks the Rams were the 13th best pass protecting team in the league last year needs to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new analysis.


    Yeah, it's much more likely that the guys at Football Outsiders don't know what they're doing with their line analysis than you. (Also, 13th isn't good, just the upper end of mediocre or average.)

    :roll:


    Got to remember Roland, its not his fault. The mantra for the team is to blame everyone but Bradford for 3 years now. Having decent producing positional groups goes against that idea.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2502
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 1:00 pm
  • I think Bradford wasn't as NFL ready as advertised anf benefitted from a weak QB class but the other side of that is he really has been cast into a nearly no win scenario and has been asked to develop amongst the middle of it.

    I don't know if he will become a top shelf/elite QB but he is moving into a better situation that should help him to grow. The question is have those first few years done to much damage?

    Even if we see good growth from him this year this I wouldn't be surprised to see even more next year as the team matures around him.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2940
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Thu Jul 25, 2013 1:24 pm
  • I still give the biggest threat title to the Niners. That team has been trouble in the making for years. I credit Harbafreak, although little for at least getting the best out of a very talented group that just couldn't get a break in 09-10.

    They are solid on the front of both sides of the ball with a QB that can make a difference. Still have Gore and Davis.

    The Rams are trouble, but frankly, they got somewhat lucky that the Hawks didn't have 14 more points in game 1 and in game 2, taking no risks were able to move the ball quite well in the end. McCoy was directly responsible for the loss of 10 points in game 2 also.

    I think the Rams get swept in 2013 and that we split with SF.
    "The life you lose may be your own" - Drunk dude at the bar
    User avatar
    loafoftatupu
    I'M JIMMY!
     
    Posts: 5554
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Auburn, WA


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:02 am
  • I agree with the OP. The more I look at the niner team, the more I see them fighting with the cards for third in the division.

    If you look at the teams that the niners beat, you'll see that every one of them was either just plain bad or one dimensional. The teams they lost to were balanced. Well, they play a lot of balanced teams this season and I think they'll have troubles.
    rideaducati
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1682
    Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 3:18 pm


Re: Surprise rival for seahawks...
Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:45 am
  • I totally agree with the OP. The more I look at the niner team, the more I see them fighting with the cards for third in the division.

    If you look at the teams that the niners beat, you'll see that every one of them was either just plain bad or one dimensional. The teams they lost to were balanced. Well, they play a lot of balanced teams this season and I think they'll have troubles.
    rideaducati
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1682
    Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 3:18 pm


PreviousNext


It is currently Wed Aug 20, 2014 10:28 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online