05:45 AM - August 16, 2011 by Steve_OS
ESPN The Gamer has posted the Madden NFL 12 player ratings for the Seattle Seahawks and St. Louis Rams.
Are there any changes you would like to see, or are they just about right?
Madden 12 News Post
05:45 AM - August 16, 2011 by Steve_OSESPN The Gamer has posted the Madden NFL 12 player ratings for the Seattle Seahawks and St. Louis Rams.
Are there any changes you would like to see, or are they just about right?
Madden NFL 12 Videos
Member Comments
# 41
DeuceDouglas @ 08/18/11 05:29 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Maybe it's the Rams playcalling that's clouding my perception of him, I don't know. Maybe it's the fact that the Rams leading receiver was Danny Amendola. I still don't know but for me, the jury's still out on Bradford.
|
|||||||||||||
|
. And I know on my way out the last thing I was hearing was how impressed people were with Cassel, Bowe, and Charles. That was the quietest I've ever heard that stadium other than maybe when the Hawks fell down 17-0 to the Lions a couple years back.
# 42
Yeah...THAT Guy @ 08/18/11 10:27 AM
I'm curious as to what proof there is that Bradford is better than Eli Manning or Tony Romo. I'm a Bucs fan, and I think Freeman will eventually be better than both of them, but right now, I think it's a bit premature to put him above either of those two, and Freeman outplayed Bradford last year without a doubt.
Is there even a single statistic in which Bradford has Eli or Romo beat besides Eli's INT totals (but Eli also threw way more TDs)?
Is there even a single statistic in which Bradford has Eli or Romo beat besides Eli's INT totals (but Eli also threw way more TDs)?
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
LMAO you lost all credibility including these players in your 15 QBs better than Sam Bradford list. I mean, this wasn't serious was it?
You were joking right?
EDIT:
Wow. 5 QBs in this list called Matt. Didn't ever notice that was such a QB name...
# 46
Yeah...THAT Guy @ 08/19/11 11:15 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 47
DeuceDouglas @ 08/19/11 11:58 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Joe Flacco took his team to the AFC Championship as a rookie and they've made the playoffs every year he's been quarterback. And in a division far tougher than that vaunted NFC West.
As for Cassel, go back and watch the Rams-Chiefs game last year. Enough Said.
Matthew Stafford has shown more in his limited time than Bradford showed all of last season.
Could you see Bradford going up against the Saints in the NFC Wild Card round and putting up a game like Hasselbeck did? I don't think so.
Tony Romo, while probably overrated has taken the Cowboys to the playoffs on multiple occasions.
Kevin Kolb, see Matt Stafford.
I'm not sold on Bradford yet...
Had 3,512 yards and 18 TDs.
Had no "elite" targets.
He also had 15 INTs and 7 FUM
Finished near the top of the league in attempts, overinflating his yards and touchdown metrics. Yards and touchdowns aren't good ways to grade quarterbacks, but that doesn't stop people from doing just that.
Played for a team with just a couple of wins in the prior year, so the quarterback would get credit for any regression to the mean in the form of a significant increase in wins;
Played a really weak (in fact the 2nd weakest) schedule that boosted the quarterback's individual stats and team wins;
Played for a team whose defense got a lot better without adding any big names, so people can just think "what's the difference between them this year and last year? That rookie QB and not much else."
Finished with a 60% completion rate, he also dumped the ball of a ton. In fact, he was 2nd to last in the NFL in yards per completion at 6.0 ypc (second to only the great Jimmy Clausen).
Don't get me wrong, I like Bradford. But, I don't think he will be "elite"... I can see him as a good player (but not elite).
Had 3,512 yards and 18 TDs.
Had no "elite" targets.
He also had 15 INTs and 7 FUM
Finished near the top of the league in attempts, overinflating his yards and touchdown metrics. Yards and touchdowns aren't good ways to grade quarterbacks, but that doesn't stop people from doing just that.
Played for a team with just a couple of wins in the prior year, so the quarterback would get credit for any regression to the mean in the form of a significant increase in wins;
Played a really weak (in fact the 2nd weakest) schedule that boosted the quarterback's individual stats and team wins;
Played for a team whose defense got a lot better without adding any big names, so people can just think "what's the difference between them this year and last year? That rookie QB and not much else."
Finished with a 60% completion rate, he also dumped the ball of a ton. In fact, he was 2nd to last in the NFL in yards per completion at 6.0 ypc (second to only the great Jimmy Clausen).
Don't get me wrong, I like Bradford. But, I don't think he will be "elite"... I can see him as a good player (but not elite).
# 49
Dwaresacksqb @ 08/24/11 03:48 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
I will commend Joe Flacco on being drafted by the Ravens. They are an excellent team. He has done a good job managing the ball, and can make plays with his arm and his legs. He has a lot of talent, but unfortunately, he lacks a presence on the field. I don't like him in the pocket, he looks nervous sometimes. In addition to this, I feel that while icy cool most of the time, in the clutch he really underperforms. He's not a QB who'll put the team on his back and carry them to a win. He's a game manager.
Don't know how being on a better team and winning team in one game is any reason to say Cassel is better than Bradford. I mean, really? Cassel in that game was impressive, particularly because he was straight off an injury and showed some guts. However, most people would take Bradford over Cassel due to little things like Sam's better ball placement and stronger arm. It's an upside thing... Cassel doesn't have much.
I would probably say Stafford has more upside than Bradford too, and has been VERY impressive in his limited action. The main issue is, is Sam has played more games in his rookie season than Stafford has his entire career. That's an issue. In addition to that he has like 5 times the interceptions Bradford has because he forces the ball too much and makes bad decisions. Granted, he's been on bad teams but now his supporting cast is excellent.
Do you see Hasselbeck playing past the Titans bye week? This dude is done. He hurts his back jogging on the sideline man. He was a good QB, perfect WCO guy, good leader and he's funny too, but he's like 50 years old and has no future in the league. You'd take that over Offensive Rookie of the Year? C'mon son.
And won how many games? I think Romo is a good QB, but he's cost them more games than he's won in my opinion. I think in terms of regular season ability and making plays he's up there with the best. Very exciting, but again, dude is a mad choker. I haven't seen him play well in a key game yet, although I've only seen about 3 or 4 important Cowboy games, so that argument may not be too strong. You may have me on Romo, but again, I and I suspect 90% of GMs in the league would take Bradford over Romo.
and LMAO. Kevin Kolb is no where near Stafford. Kolb is straight up dreck. Handed the starting QB job and lost it after injuries and poor play. Dude has played like 3 games and has more INTs than TDs and his only impressive games are vs teams like the Browns. He's got zero physical upside, especially in comparison to Bradford. I don't see him as a leader and as a 'vet' he sure lacks any presence on the field... NEXT.
So dude, you may possibly get me on Romo, but please, just back your points up about Bradford. If you are a Bradford *****, hate in silence, because you're not saying anything that makes sense.
You get a vid of Bradford stepping up into the pocket and throwing a strike, and compare that next to these QBs above, the only one who does it with the same sort of confidence and guile is Stafford. The others don't have the ability to play the QB position the way Bradford does and will.
# 51
DeuceDouglas @ 08/24/11 10:42 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
You could put just about any QB on that Rams team last year and ran that offense and they would have put up very similar numbers. Bradford's numbers weren't an indication of his elite potential they were an indication of a very safe and low-risk offense.
|
|||||||||||||
|
I respect your opinion but the jury's still out on the Bradford.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Purely opinion. Good attempt at justifying why you feel this, but it's not anything to prove it, it's just shreds of meat on some bones.
The fact is, is MY PERSONAL OPINION is that Bradford will be 'elite' due to the non quanitfieable things, like his leadership, his poise and his intelligence. These aren't measured statistics, but are things I've gleamed from watching all his interviews, his every snap with the Rams, and seeing how the players react to him.
I think if you can take control of a team in your rookie year, command respect while knowing you're a rookie and taking rookie lumps, perform on the field and be everything you've been advertised to be, the sky is the limit.
Sam can step into a pocket like a 8 year vet. That may sound like a minor thing, but watch how Tebow can't and Clausen can't and compare that to how Sam silkily keeps his eyes downfield and hits his target, or more importantly, when the target isn't open, which is often the case with the Rams, he takes the checkdown and keeps the drive alive.
That is smart, poised play from a rookie and THAT is what I judge Sam on more than anything else.
You can throw statistics at me, but if you can't prove that Sam isn't a leader and doesn't make plays for the team, then I will be forced to disbelieve you until time answers us.
Another example... Bradford when running the no huddle last year was incredibly effective and was predominantly held back by the playcalling and reduced responsibility, aswell as the weak supporting cast.
Bradford is now in an offense built around the QB. He is now responsible for line shifts and the cadence. He has looked a little bit rough so far in pre season, due to the limited coaching, and as such expectations are low, especially with our schedule... but come the end of the season I expect our offense to get into gear and it will be NEXT year in which Bradford will make a statistical splash to go with his intangibles and physical upside.
# 53
Yeah...THAT Guy @ 08/24/11 11:18 AM
I'm not going to go back and quote all of the posts in here, but here's a few thoughts on the last few posts.
1. Statistically, Tony Romo is one of the best QBs in the NFL late in close games, and he's led 10 game winning drives in 4 years (5 years if you can't last year when he was injured). That's 10 more game-winning drives than Sam Bradford has led (yes... even Tim Tebow led more game-winning drives in his 3 starts than Bradford did in a 16 game season). In the past 5 years, Tony Romo's passer rating late in close games has been over 100 4 out of 5 times (with the one year that he wasn't above 100 being about a 69, the same as Bradford, and that was this past year when Romo was injured). There's really nothing that you can say to even argue that Bradford is better than Tony Romo right now. Statistically, Bradford's rookie season was worse than every single one of Romo's seasons as a starter (yes I know Bradford was only a rookie, but just saying, you're accusing people of just using opinions when there's absolutely nothing that you can possibly say to back up saying Bradford is better than Romo).
2. Joe Flacco has led 8 game-winning drives in 3 years, including 4 this past year, with three of those being against top 10 passing defenses. In Flacco's 3 years in the league, his passer rating late in close games has been higher than Bradford every season, so again, there's really nothing that can be said to back up saying Bradford is better than Flacco right now, and honestly, I think most people would agree that with Flacco's huge arm and decent mobility, he has more potential than Bradford too. Flacco was strictly a game-manager in his rookie season, and yet he still managed to lead his team to 2 game-winning drives (2 more than Bradford), and had a higher YPA than Bradford.
3. Matt Cassel has 6 game-winning drives in 3 years as a starter (6 more than Bradford's zero), and while he's had his share of struggles late in games the past few seasons, again, he's still at least led a game-winning drive. Cassell was strictly a game-manager in his first year in Kansas City, but this past season he put up excellent numbers, and certainly showed more than Sam Bradford to this point. Bradford does absolutely have more potential though.
4. "I think if you can take control of a team in your rookie year, command respect while knowing you're a rookie and taking rookie lumps, perform on the field and be everything you've been advertised to be, the sky is the limit."
This is pretty much the definition of Tim Tebow. Yes, I saw that the next sentence you said that Tebow can't step up in the pocket or whatever, but neither could Vince Young and Michael Vick when they were younger and (with the exception of Young's off-the-field issues) they've turned out pretty good. But anyway, there's really no way to prove one way or another that because Bradford was able to take control of a team, that that means he'll be elite. When Jeff Garcia was in Philly and Tampa Bay, he took control of the team. Taking control of a team =/= elite, and your opinion is much more unfounded than the guy that quoted pretty much an essay of reasons not to put any stock into Bradford's rookie season.
Edit: And the fact that you're saying you just refuse to believe anyone because nobody can prove that Bradford isn't a leader is just silly. There's been plenty of leaders in the NFL that were never elite, and I think it's obvious that there's no way to prove that somebody isn't a leader. Hell, you could even say Trent Dilfer was a leader in the Ravens' Super Bowl season, so maybe Bradford will turn out like Dilfer? Or maybe he'll turn out like Bruce Gradkowski, another leader. Or maybe he'll turn out like Drew Brees, another leader. As you can see, the fact that a guy is a leader really has no bearing on whether or not he'll be elite, it's just a small step in the right direction.
1. Statistically, Tony Romo is one of the best QBs in the NFL late in close games, and he's led 10 game winning drives in 4 years (5 years if you can't last year when he was injured). That's 10 more game-winning drives than Sam Bradford has led (yes... even Tim Tebow led more game-winning drives in his 3 starts than Bradford did in a 16 game season). In the past 5 years, Tony Romo's passer rating late in close games has been over 100 4 out of 5 times (with the one year that he wasn't above 100 being about a 69, the same as Bradford, and that was this past year when Romo was injured). There's really nothing that you can say to even argue that Bradford is better than Tony Romo right now. Statistically, Bradford's rookie season was worse than every single one of Romo's seasons as a starter (yes I know Bradford was only a rookie, but just saying, you're accusing people of just using opinions when there's absolutely nothing that you can possibly say to back up saying Bradford is better than Romo).
2. Joe Flacco has led 8 game-winning drives in 3 years, including 4 this past year, with three of those being against top 10 passing defenses. In Flacco's 3 years in the league, his passer rating late in close games has been higher than Bradford every season, so again, there's really nothing that can be said to back up saying Bradford is better than Flacco right now, and honestly, I think most people would agree that with Flacco's huge arm and decent mobility, he has more potential than Bradford too. Flacco was strictly a game-manager in his rookie season, and yet he still managed to lead his team to 2 game-winning drives (2 more than Bradford), and had a higher YPA than Bradford.
3. Matt Cassel has 6 game-winning drives in 3 years as a starter (6 more than Bradford's zero), and while he's had his share of struggles late in games the past few seasons, again, he's still at least led a game-winning drive. Cassell was strictly a game-manager in his first year in Kansas City, but this past season he put up excellent numbers, and certainly showed more than Sam Bradford to this point. Bradford does absolutely have more potential though.
4. "I think if you can take control of a team in your rookie year, command respect while knowing you're a rookie and taking rookie lumps, perform on the field and be everything you've been advertised to be, the sky is the limit."
This is pretty much the definition of Tim Tebow. Yes, I saw that the next sentence you said that Tebow can't step up in the pocket or whatever, but neither could Vince Young and Michael Vick when they were younger and (with the exception of Young's off-the-field issues) they've turned out pretty good. But anyway, there's really no way to prove one way or another that because Bradford was able to take control of a team, that that means he'll be elite. When Jeff Garcia was in Philly and Tampa Bay, he took control of the team. Taking control of a team =/= elite, and your opinion is much more unfounded than the guy that quoted pretty much an essay of reasons not to put any stock into Bradford's rookie season.
Edit: And the fact that you're saying you just refuse to believe anyone because nobody can prove that Bradford isn't a leader is just silly. There's been plenty of leaders in the NFL that were never elite, and I think it's obvious that there's no way to prove that somebody isn't a leader. Hell, you could even say Trent Dilfer was a leader in the Ravens' Super Bowl season, so maybe Bradford will turn out like Dilfer? Or maybe he'll turn out like Bruce Gradkowski, another leader. Or maybe he'll turn out like Drew Brees, another leader. As you can see, the fact that a guy is a leader really has no bearing on whether or not he'll be elite, it's just a small step in the right direction.
|
|||||||||||||
|
With regards to Romo, I don't doubt that, but just because he wins games late doesn't mean they're important. As far as I remember he fumbles game winning field goal holds, throws picks to Polamalu and other DBs and makes bad decisions when it's all on the line. With regards to be a regular season QB, Romo is up there with Rivers and Manning as an elite, but you combine his age and this nervousness in the clutch, in addition to a less than tight spiral and I have 3 things that are enough for me to pass on taking Romo over Sam. I'm not saying Sam is clutch, but he has not had the opportunity to prove it, or when he's had the opportunity to, he's been let down by poor play from his WRs.
with regards to Flacco's rookie season, that's entirely the system they had in place. They could pound the rock with 3 good RBs then use Playaction and rollouts to get big chunks of yardage through the air.
I'm not sure where Arm strength and Mobility equals higher upside than accuracy, mobility, leadership, poise and intelligence. Again, I'm not saying Flacco hasn't got these things, but as a preference, I'd rather my QB have pin point accuracy than a cannon. Bradford is a better athlete than Flacco with regards to mobility too.
With regards to Cassel, you're bang on.
I am not saying Sam is better than those guys right now, but you have to judge a player on potential as well as what he's done, especially when discussing someone who just came off a rookie season.
When I said 15 guys you'd take over Bradford, I meant with regards to a fantasy draft. I don't think many would take Cassel, Flacco or Romo over Bradford if starting a new franchise.
With regards to my statement you quoted, Tim Tebow may be that intangible king, but he doesn't have the football skills to go with it. Likewise with Dilfer and Garcia. They were solid, but with regards to upside, did they have Bradford's ball placement? Mobility? Intelligence? Did they even have Bradford's arm strength and quick release?
It is my belief that when a rookie Qb comes into a squad, demonstrates the physical skills that got him drafted and then demonstrates the leadership, poise, intelligence and comfort in the pros that Bradford did, that equals elite prospects.
Of course, anything can happen and Sam's O Line may get hurt and Sam will be broken and end up like David Carr, but currently, the way things are panning out, Bradford is demonstrating a grasp beyond his years, tremendous physical ability and a 'franchise mentality' that, coupled with a savvy FO point to a future along the lines of Peyton Manning.
I personally feel Bradford will etch his own history and will not be compared to greats like Peyton, but there are many parallels in the way Sam came in and did what he did.
As I've repeated a million times, it is not quantifiable data that is so promising about Bradford, it's everything about him. He oozes star QB, and to deny it is in my personal opinion short sighted.
You have put some good points forward, and I commend you for it, but I can't repeat often enough that a QB isn't judged on statistics, it's about what they do for a team, and Bradford is and will become as important to the Rams as Peyton Manning is to the Colts.
Mull over this.
Josh McDaniels is putting sophomore QB Sam Bradford solely in charge of making his own protection calls at the LOS. You know who else does this? Only 2 QBs... Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.
If an NFL OC has the faith in Bradford to give him this massive responsibility, why do people insist on saying he's only OK?
Again, statistically, his ROOKIE numbers were middle of the pack. As it's silly to judge players JUST on rookie seasons, especially statistics where so much comes into play, you've gotta look at the intangibles in conjunction with production and estimate a curve.
Sam's curve is off the charts when this is done and it'll be nigh on impossible to prove otherwise without depending on circumstantial things like injury and coach changes, which are all incredibly possible.
# 55
Yeah...THAT Guy @ 08/24/11 03:53 PM
Regarding Romo, I think it's significant that 5 of Romo's 10 game-winning drives have been against Division foes, and another one was against Peyton Manning, so I would consider that to be 6 pretty big games. People seem to live in the past way too much, harping on Romo for the field goal that slipped out of his hands. Just two years ago, Romo led the Cowboys against McNabb and the Eagles in the playoffs and answered his critics by leading the Cowboys to their first playoff win in a long time if I recall correctly, and he played great in that game. Yes, they came out and got flattened by Brett Favre and the Vikings the next week, but Romo has now proven he can win in the post-season.
And obviously those guys should have more game-winning drives than Bradford because they've been in the league longer, but we're talking about a kid that didn't lead a single game-winning drive. All of those other guys have had at least one in every full season that they've played (actually might be at least 2 or 3 each season). And I don't buy this idea that Bradford never had an opportunity last year. The Rams lost 4 games that were one possession games last year if I'm reading their schedule right. In one of those games, Bradford threw INTs on their final two drives of the game to lose by a field goal. In two other games, he got off to hot starts and built an early lead, and then struggled in the 2nd half as his team lost to Bruce Gradkowski and Josh Freeman. And then in the 4th, he did lead a game-tying drive as he got his team in position for the tying field goal, but they lost in OT as Bradford was outplayed by Troy Smith. So the opportunities were there, he just didn't get it done.
And obviously those guys should have more game-winning drives than Bradford because they've been in the league longer, but we're talking about a kid that didn't lead a single game-winning drive. All of those other guys have had at least one in every full season that they've played (actually might be at least 2 or 3 each season). And I don't buy this idea that Bradford never had an opportunity last year. The Rams lost 4 games that were one possession games last year if I'm reading their schedule right. In one of those games, Bradford threw INTs on their final two drives of the game to lose by a field goal. In two other games, he got off to hot starts and built an early lead, and then struggled in the 2nd half as his team lost to Bruce Gradkowski and Josh Freeman. And then in the 4th, he did lead a game-tying drive as he got his team in position for the tying field goal, but they lost in OT as Bradford was outplayed by Troy Smith. So the opportunities were there, he just didn't get it done.
Post A Comment
Working...