06:45 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
06:45 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
Top priorities, draft a shutdown corner, turn Lance Kendricks into a star TE, draft a RB that will be ready to replace Steven Jackson in two seasons, draft another top corner, find the next LT at LB, make a 60 yard field goal just like Josh Brown just did last week.
# 22
angels eclipse7 @ 08/16/11 08:19 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Have you not watched a Rams game before? Or Sam in Oklahoma? Sam's deep ball is stunning, and the simple reason he only threw a handful of deep passes that were completed, was because his WRs had no seperation and butter fingers.
Sam is capable of throwing everything, but he's a smart QB and didn't make many rookie mistakes and took what the D and his WRs gave him, so to see he isn't capable of consistently throwing downfield is kinda ridiculous.
Sam is an 85 because he has all the tools a QB needs, and has the potential to be, and is on course to be, one of the top 3 QBs in the NFL. His accuracy on every level is off the charts, his awareness is excellent for such a young QB (with room to grow) and his athleticism is vastly underrated in the media (but maybe a tad high on Madden).
OK.
Bradford rant over, let's dissect these Rams ratings and see quite how awful they are.
Firstly, what is most surprising, is how Billy Bajema is the highest rated TE. That's just plain stupid. Dude has rock hands, and is even overrated as a blocker (is solid enough to be a blocking specialist, but he's not a dominating blocker).
Fells, who is no longer a Ram, is a better TE and he's a jack of all master of none TE.
Kendricks out of college and in one pre-season game has shown more than both Fells and Bajema combined lol.
The fact he's 76 speed is absolutely ridiculous, and even worse is his 65 strength and 70 route running. Dude is as crisp in and out of his routes than 80% of that Rams WR corps, and he is strong, just hasn't learnt to harness it yet. He's a beast to get down with YAC too, which should play into his strength.
Hoomanawanui's ratings are a joke too. Call him slow all you want or concussion prone but he can run a solid route and has soft as hell hands, in open space and in traffic. Also makes some impressive catches to difficult balls in space.
The WR ratings are a mess. Danario ran a 4.4 on a rehabilitating knee, after his 4th surgery on it, and is given an 87 speed? A full 7 points lower than Dez Bryant?
Sure, knock his acceleration, which is about right, maybe even too high, but once in full stride, he glides past DBs and is very FAST. His routes and agility suffer, but top end speed and leaping ability are ridiculous.
And don't say that 87 speed is due to scaled back ratings when Rich Eisen would get 95 speed the way these ratings are playing out.
The fact Avery is a 67 injury rating, despite only being on IR once, and Danario who's knee is medically described as 'mush' has a mid 70's rating, is laughable.
I cba to go into the rest of the WR ratings, but they're all pretty much off on some crucial ratings, with only a few looking about right.
The O line is comic.
Jacob Bell as our top rated lineman? What has Donny been smoking? Or which games did he watch? or which PFF stats did he look at?
There's a reason he was asked to restructure his deal, and a reason he did.
Jason Smith is all potential, but is merely, at this stage, above average.
Saffold with a 55 toughness? I mean really? Is that a typo??????
Where's Adam Goldberg? And how on earth is Hank Fraley an 80???
Setts a 76? He didn't even make the roster last year did he?
Rams LB corps has changed a great deal in FA, so none of these guys are barely relevant.
JL's speed a tad too low, I'd give him borderline 80, around 79 with better acceleration but that's a bit pedantic.
7th round rook Jabara Williams has nice speed, but don't know where the 71 zone came from. He was a small school player, and is often described as a rangy tackling machine, with phenomenal athletic ability, but VERY RAW in the finer elements of the sport.
On the DLine, nice to see Chris Long get some props. He had a stellar season, and is about right.
Robert Quinn 78 toughness? Dude had a tumour, and overcame it to be picked 14th overall after missing a year due to suspension. Don't know how toughness can be a knock, when he's a tough guy just again, raw. Does this mean should he be injured, it's an IR job? feels like an unwarranted slap in the face.
Selvie has put on 15 lbs of muscle (and as such is stronger than 64 strength, and he's a speed bullrusher, not an all finesse DE), and as such is much improved as a DE, starting the 1st pre season game in the place of Hall, so why he's amongst the lowest rated DEs on the Rams is madness. He's definitely 4th best right now.
Bartell always underrated in speed when he's been known to run down many a burner in his time... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUlet8CQbGI
He's in fact, according to advanced statistics the 6th best shutdown corner in the NFL, smothering opposing CBs and always lining up on the #1. The only issue is he couldn't catch a cold, so never has the sexy INTs to make people realise.
Bradley Fletcher in one year of starting has proved himself to be an upper echelon CB, often ranked alongside Bartell and the other shutdown CBs like Revis, Nnamdi and Sean Smith of the Dolphins(? lol) on advanced statistic site PFF. His play is excellent too. A very aggressive CB who sticks to assignments with discipline, but doesn't make many aggressive risks on the ball. Just a tough cover CB basically.
Just LOL at his and Bartell's press ratings too.
Also massively underrated in agility as all Rams DBs seem to be...
How is Justin King a 70+ MCV CB? In training camp he's elite, but in the season he's below average and lacks the concentration to utilise his physical gifts, often getting burned for big plays.
All I can say is thank god Dockery is no longer a Ram lol
Darian Stewart is rated quite well, although tackle is a bit low. His potential should be at least a B, he's always making plays and is a perfect scheme fit.
Jermale Hines is rated how Taylor Mays should be, except Mays should have 95 speed lol
In all honesty, he got raped in ratings, and is a very promising SS, but I don't expect anything else... IN fact at OSU, he showed surprising zone awareness, and is a hitter but is a SS/OLB tweener and abit stiff.
Jonathan Nelson, who didn't play much in college, is massively overrated, but again has some solid real life skills that shouldn't be so apparent as a rook in Madden... He's a CB/FS tweener, and has soft hands and coverage skills, but can't tackle too well. Projects as a situational FS and nickel/dime CB. With these ratings he looks like a bonafide starter in 2 seasons in Madden.
In essence, this is another god awful bunch of Rams ratings on a stupidly old and inaccurately old (as in some players never playing for the Rams... Saddler McQueen??? or being cut since the end of last season... Dockery etc.)
I honestly can't get over how bad these ratings are, and how it's been allowed for ovrs and ratings to get souped up, considering they're meant to be 'scaled back'.
It's an embarrassment to EA and fans of the sport to see such illogically bad ratings.
Can we please get some way of at least telling the guy what's what with each team??????
# 24
DeuceDouglas @ 08/16/11 10:27 PM
@ infemous
He only threw a handful of deep passes period. 8% of his 590 pass attempts were thrown 20+ yards down the field. When you consider he ranked in the bottom half of the league in completion percentage while throwing almost exclusively short "easy" throws, his numbers are rather pedestrian. His average per attempt was only higher than Jimmy Clausen's last year. Every QB is capable of making all the throws, that's why they're in the NFL to begin with. But, from what I've seen from Bradford is not worthy of an 85 rating. Anytime the Rams are behind they are going to have a tough time coming back because of how vanilla the offense is (see vs. KC, @SEA, @NO).
He only threw a handful of deep passes period. 8% of his 590 pass attempts were thrown 20+ yards down the field. When you consider he ranked in the bottom half of the league in completion percentage while throwing almost exclusively short "easy" throws, his numbers are rather pedestrian. His average per attempt was only higher than Jimmy Clausen's last year. Every QB is capable of making all the throws, that's why they're in the NFL to begin with. But, from what I've seen from Bradford is not worthy of an 85 rating. Anytime the Rams are behind they are going to have a tough time coming back because of how vanilla the offense is (see vs. KC, @SEA, @NO).
# 25
TeixeiraFanatic @ 08/16/11 10:55 PM
What to do you want him to do? Be a type of quarterback that he isn't? That was the type of offense that we used. We played that way because he was a rookie. It gave him confidence.
I'll take you back to Week 17 against the Seahawks. I can't think of the receiver off the top of my head, but Bradford hit him in stride 30-40 yards downfield with no one in between the him and endzone and it went straight through his hands. Now if you're Sam, why would you want to keep going deep if all your wide-outs are gonna do is drop the ball.
As it's been pointed out before in this thread, we didn't have the personnel to go deep. Avery was out the entire year. Alexander, arguably the fastest guy we had last year, wasn't on the team until the second half of the season. That's like having Joe Jurevicius running streaks. Why do it if you know it isn't gonna work.
You play to a player's strength, especially a young quarterback who is the face and future of the team. Bradford has all the tools to be a great great quarterback in the NFL. All he needed was some confidence.
Now that he has last season under his belt, I expect to see him really blossom this year. Having McDaniels will surely help him and I think you will see Sam throw downfield more often this year.
Edit: It was Danario Alexander that dropped the pass Week 17. The ball traveled 55 yards in the air and went right through Danario's hands. Don't know how to embed videos so here's the link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfzEv...eature=related
I'll take you back to Week 17 against the Seahawks. I can't think of the receiver off the top of my head, but Bradford hit him in stride 30-40 yards downfield with no one in between the him and endzone and it went straight through his hands. Now if you're Sam, why would you want to keep going deep if all your wide-outs are gonna do is drop the ball.
As it's been pointed out before in this thread, we didn't have the personnel to go deep. Avery was out the entire year. Alexander, arguably the fastest guy we had last year, wasn't on the team until the second half of the season. That's like having Joe Jurevicius running streaks. Why do it if you know it isn't gonna work.
You play to a player's strength, especially a young quarterback who is the face and future of the team. Bradford has all the tools to be a great great quarterback in the NFL. All he needed was some confidence.
Now that he has last season under his belt, I expect to see him really blossom this year. Having McDaniels will surely help him and I think you will see Sam throw downfield more often this year.
Edit: It was Danario Alexander that dropped the pass Week 17. The ball traveled 55 yards in the air and went right through Danario's hands. Don't know how to embed videos so here's the link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfzEv...eature=related
|
|||||||||||||
|
Firstly, he's a rookie. Do you judge rookie QBs against 5 and 6 year pros? I don't, and Sam Bradford, statistically, had the 3rd Best Rookie season of all time, on a team that went 1-15 the year before.
Secondly, no supporting cast. Can you name a Rams receiver last year? Do you know what they're good at and what they're not?
Thirdly, play design and play calls can't be held against him. That's like criticising a punter for always giving the ball to the opposition.
Finally, Madden ratings aren't done with any degree of thought, so I don't know why you're thinking there was a method to the 85 lol.
Personally, I agree with THAT rating, one of very few I do, but if you actually WATCH a Rams game, you'll see that his accuracy is better than 70% of the league's starting quarterbacks ALREADY. That's off just a rookie season.
His poise and ball placement is damn near elite already, and his decision making, while simplified was excellent. Obviously he had lapses, but you can see the gulf between Bradford and Clausen can't you?
So stop hating. Bradford is worthy of a high madden rating purely because of what he CAN do, not what he DID in his rookie season.
Ya dig?
PS. I still think these ratings are abysmal.
# 27
DeuceDouglas @ 08/17/11 03:45 AM
If everyone was rated based on what they could do then every player would be rated in the 90's. Nobody should be rated on what they CAN do, they should be rated on what they've already DONE. Since you're obviously a Rams homer maybe you should go back and watch the Chiefs-Rams game from last year. Then you can watch the Seahawks-Rams finale where he was outplayed by "Clipboard-Jesus."
Part of being quarterback in the NFL is playing with the hand you are dealt and doing the best to make chicken salad out of chicken sh**.
Part of being quarterback in the NFL is playing with the hand you are dealt and doing the best to make chicken salad out of chicken sh**.
# 28
Yeah...THAT Guy @ 08/17/11 03:56 AM
Honestly, based on Tebow's 3 starts, he outplayed Sam Bradford last year (obviously a small sample size). Tebow put up more yards per game, well more TDs per game, and turned the ball over at just a slightly higher rate. Meanwhile, he led as many 4th quarter comebacks in 3 games as Bradford did in 16, and Tebow rejuvenated a Broncos team that looked dead on the field up until Tebow came back. Suddenly Brandon Lloyd became a big time threat again, suddenly the defense could actually stop offenses every once in awhile, and suddenly the Broncos were scoring more points than they had the rest of the season. Meanwhile, in Bradford's biggest game of the season, he was outplayed by the Seahawks' backup QB, and couldn't muster up a TD as his team lost their chance at the playoffs.
Do I think Tebow is a better QB than Bradford? Hell no. Do I think he's a better player than Bradford? Again, hell no. But did Bradford really do anything that warrants being rated at just about the same level as Eli Manning and presumably Josh Freeman, Tony Romo, and a bunch of other good-great QBs, absolutely not. They should rate him based on what he did last year, and then give him an A for potential so that he will probably develop into a great QB. He isn't there yet, and even if he is, he didn't show anything to prove it last year.
Do I think Tebow is a better QB than Bradford? Hell no. Do I think he's a better player than Bradford? Again, hell no. But did Bradford really do anything that warrants being rated at just about the same level as Eli Manning and presumably Josh Freeman, Tony Romo, and a bunch of other good-great QBs, absolutely not. They should rate him based on what he did last year, and then give him an A for potential so that he will probably develop into a great QB. He isn't there yet, and even if he is, he didn't show anything to prove it last year.
# 29
therockstar2005 @ 08/17/11 10:36 AM
@ Apostle - thank you, even though you're a fan of the team that I despise 
Look, if Bradford was ranked lower than 85, I would understand and I wouldn't be pissed about it. I am actually somewhat (pleasantly) surprised that he's an 85. I get that part of it is hype. But over the course of the whole season, he started every snap as a rookie, helped bring a 6 win turnaround to a team that had won only 6 games in the 3 years before. I still think the hype is deserved.
The Tom Brady comparison is funny, because Brady was still a mainly short-range passer when the receivers that he had could only do that. But once Randy Moss got onto the scene, suddenly the deep bomb came alive, and passing records were broken. Did Brady magically figure out how to go deep, or did he finally have a real weapon on offense who could? Come on. We make a big deal about the QB, and we still should, but you have to account for what the QB has around him, and the Rams receivers are still not that good. I like our receivers this year, but our best one is most likely Mike Sims-Walker...yeah. Unless Donnie Avery pulls a miracle comeback, we don't have a real deep threat.
Douglas is right about one thing - being a QB in the NFL is about making the best of what you've got. So if your receivers aren't fast, don't have good hands, and can't stay healthy, do you just say f*ck it and still throw the deep ball (ex. Rex Grossman) or do you play to what your receivers can do? I want to see the Rams go deep more this season, and hopefully with McDaniels at the helm, we might try that, but it's not just on Bradford if they don't.
Look, if Bradford was ranked lower than 85, I would understand and I wouldn't be pissed about it. I am actually somewhat (pleasantly) surprised that he's an 85. I get that part of it is hype. But over the course of the whole season, he started every snap as a rookie, helped bring a 6 win turnaround to a team that had won only 6 games in the 3 years before. I still think the hype is deserved.
The Tom Brady comparison is funny, because Brady was still a mainly short-range passer when the receivers that he had could only do that. But once Randy Moss got onto the scene, suddenly the deep bomb came alive, and passing records were broken. Did Brady magically figure out how to go deep, or did he finally have a real weapon on offense who could? Come on. We make a big deal about the QB, and we still should, but you have to account for what the QB has around him, and the Rams receivers are still not that good. I like our receivers this year, but our best one is most likely Mike Sims-Walker...yeah. Unless Donnie Avery pulls a miracle comeback, we don't have a real deep threat.
Douglas is right about one thing - being a QB in the NFL is about making the best of what you've got. So if your receivers aren't fast, don't have good hands, and can't stay healthy, do you just say f*ck it and still throw the deep ball (ex. Rex Grossman) or do you play to what your receivers can do? I want to see the Rams go deep more this season, and hopefully with McDaniels at the helm, we might try that, but it's not just on Bradford if they don't.
# 30
Yeah...THAT Guy @ 08/17/11 11:00 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
2. Charlie Whitehurst was making some very nice throws and did a very good job of managing the game and protecting the ball.
3. You talk about how bad the Rams WRs were (which they were), but you don't give Whitehurst any credit for playing with his ****tastic WRs.
4. Yes, Alexander dropped a deep ball. That catch wouldn't have even put them inside the redzone.
5. Bradford got caught staring his receivers down (like a rookie QB, no problem with that moving forward). He had at least 4 or 5 passes batted down at the line of scrimmage from staring his guys down and then threw an INT into double coverage because he stared his guy down.
6. Bradford led his team to two field goals, and probably would have only been one if his team hadn't stripped Marshawn Lynch in field goal range.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Many props to the Seahawk fan defending Bradford, I think you're the only one I don't despise. Congrats to you for being a fair evaluator of talent and the fan of the sport these others wish they were.
Ok, now let me deal with your ridiculous argument sir, for it is too nonsensical to ignore.
Name 15 QBs in the league you'd have over Bradford. In all honesty now...
OK rookie season? Come on dude, are you playing dumb? There have only been 2 better rookie seasons STATISTICALLY, and if you watched the games, you'd see that Sam demolishes the eye test too. How many rookie QBs have you seen step into a huddle and command it like he did. How many rookie QBs have you seen immediately elevate the play of his pedestrian supporting cast?
Before you say someone like Roethlisberger or someone, look at draft position. The Rams earned that 1st ovr pick by being AWFUL. Not moving up like the Jets did for Sanchez. There was a solid Defensive core, and Steven Jackson. Sam Bradford came in and everything else improved too. That's beyond statistical greatness. Bradford didn't have an elite run game like Matt Ryan did, or a great WR in Roddy White. Definitely didn't have the Jets or Ravens defense either... So please, before you throw more crap about Sam's 'OK rookie season' at me, make sure you got your facts right.
I still wanna know 15 better QBs than Sam btw... lol
If there was logic to the ratings, I'd imagine the reasoning would be that Sam Bradford's skillset is better than the majority of starting QBs and as such, with his skills being added into a formula, equate to a high OVR.
What do you want from a QB? He's got it all.
-Leader
-Smart
-Accurate (beyond belief)
-Poised
-Athletic
-More than enough arm to make any type of throw.
-His accuracy is great on a short and intermediate level, and good (not great) on the deep level. Excellent throw on the run, decent play action fake.
-Throws a tight spiral, catchable ball.
-Quick release
Now about the Seahawks game... SMH
Bro, you're using one game to evaluate Bradford's talent? How about you analyse the San Diego game, or the Denver game or even the first Seahawks game? Or the home game vs San Fran?
You can't make a well founded argument about a player you clearly know nothing about from one game.
Firstly, Sam WAS A ROOKIE QB. You expect him to play like Peyton Manning as a rookie? Because if you compare the statistics, rookie season to rookie season, they're not far off and Sam broke several of Peyton's rookie records. He also didn't have Marvin Harrison to throw to, nor Marshall Faulk in the backfield.
2nd. Charlie Whitehurst threw tosses all game and made one nice throw that was fortunately caught. His first few drives literally consisted of him throwing swing passes and screens. Don't try and say Whitehurst outplayed Bradford.
The Seahawks as a TEAM and specifically the coaching staff outplayed the Rams.
3rd. Name a Rams receiver from last season. I dare you to. You know that the starters vs the Seahawks were Laurent Robinson (officially, according to advanced stats, the 3rd Worst WR in the entire league last year.), Brandon Gibson a 2nd year WR ex 6th round draft choice, and Danny Amendola (UDFA). Danario Alexander a rookie UDFA also made a few appearances and crucially missed two VERY catchable balls that would have put the Rams in a position to win the game.
I think most people would prefer to have ex 1st Round WR Mike Williams over any of those other guys. Or is it just me?
Alexander's dropped ball, well THAT one, would have put the Rams in field goal range. There was another DX drop, as well as Fells' crucial drops and a couple of miscues by Robinson and Gibson...
I won't excuse the staring down of his receivers, but that was the first game it was an actual issue. He did it once or twice in each other game, but it appeared playing on MNF at Qwest Field rattled him and all the other inexperienced guys out on the field. That's a rookie thing and will be a concern if it carries over into this upcoming season.
You do realise that the Rams playcalling in that game, specifically on offense, was AWFUL. Steven Jackson was carving the D, but was limited to 10 carries, and as such the playoff hopes of the Rams rested on a (can't repeat this enough) ROOKIE QB and journeymen WRs and TEs.
Normally if a team picks 1st Overall, they should get a soft schedule. It's the way the league is structured homie. No soft schedule excuses for this upcoming season. The Rams play the last 4 Superbowl champs.
Also, those 6 horrible teams the Rams beat last year, were all supposed to be better than the Rams. How can you say just because the Rams beat ****ty teams that it's less of an achievement coming off 1-15? C'mon son!
Now you're really making me laugh. Tebow OUTPLAYED Bradford in his 3 starts?
You mean the same Tebow who only registered 50% cp vs the Texans??? I don't need to explain why I mention the Texans do I?
The same 'QB' who not only had a vastly superior supporting cast in those 3 starts (besides defense and RB) but the same 'QB' who's mechanics and accuracy are so bad I'm surprised his WRs didn't give up on his throws. instead they bailed him out and took the subsequent hits.
It's quite ridiculous how you and/or anyone even tries to bring up Tebow when talking about Bradford. You're literally comparing a QB to a FB here...
The whole thing about him being rated with those QBs is down to how jacked up the rating system is.
It should be that a 70 is a useable starting player, in which I'd rate Bradford at 79, Eli at 81, Romo at 77 and Freeman at 83. For perspective, I'd have Peyton Manning at 92 as the top QB.
Don't hate on Bradford and make stupid comments about his ability because you have beef with the awfulness of the ratings system on Madden.
With this system, and this souped up OVR approach to Madden, Bradford is exactly where he should be in Madden and where he is in reality... on the cusp of elite status.
# 32
TeixeiraFanatic @ 08/17/11 05:25 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
He had three starts, 1 vs. Raiders (20th best passer rating against), 1 vs. Texans (worst passer rating against), 1 vs. Chargers (4th best passer rating against). Of those three, Bradford played against two, Oakland and San Diego. Let us compare the games these two played against them.
Tim Tebow stats:
OAK: 8-16, 50% comp, 138yds, 1 TD, 0 INT
SD: 16-36, 44% comp, 205yds, 2 TD, 2 INT
Sam Bradford stats:
OAK: 14-25, 56% comp, 167yds, 2 TD, 1 INT
SD: 18-31, 58.1% comp, 198yds, 1 TD, 0 INT
It seems to me, that Sam played better against the two than Tebow did.
I'm not gonna give Tebow a whole lot of recognition to his game against Houston because of awful they were at stopping the passing game. I will give him some because no matter the team you play against, it is worthy of noting he did pass for over 300 yards.
# 33
Yeah...THAT Guy @ 08/17/11 05:46 PM
Bradford had a good rookie season. But that doesn't mean that Bradford had a good season compared to all of the other QBs in the league, which is how you're supposed to figure out these ratings. That's all I'm saying. Is Bradford a great young QB? Yes. But he's a young QB, and just because he had a good season by rookie standards, does not mean that we should rate him in the same class as guys like Tony Romo (or in your opinion, higher than Romo, which is just unbelieveable).
That's my main point. He had a great season for a rookie QB, but compared to other QBs in the league, it wasn't special, and certainly wasn't on the level of guys like Freeman, Romo, or Eli Manning. He shouldn't be given the rating based on what he can be, he should earn the rating based on what he's done, and he didn't do anything spectacular that year compared to the other starting QBs in the league.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding Tebow, as I've already pointed out, in his 3 starts, he put up a little over 280 yards per game, while Bradford put up somewhere around 215-220 per game if I recall correctly. Bradford scored 19 TDs in 16 games (just barely over 1 per game). Tebow scored 8 TDs in 3 starts (almost 3 TDs per game). Bradford had 15 interceptions and 7 fumbles in 16 games, so 22 possible turnovers (obviously some fumbles weren't lost), or a little under 1.5 turnovers per game. Tebow had 3 INTs and 1 fumble in 3 starts, so they turned it over at about the same rate, with Tebow turning it over just barely less. Tebow led as many 4th quarter comebacks in 3 starts (1) as Bradford did in his 16 starts, and Tebow's team averaged around 23 points per game in his 3 starts, compared to about 18 per game for Bradford and about 20 per game from Orton before he was benched for Tebow (just pointing out that Denver's offense performed better under Tebow so it wasn't just Tebow being in a better offense, which he was). Also, for what it's worth, ESPN's new QBR gave Tebow about a 54 (just barely above average), while Bradford was below average according to QBR. Obviously it was a very small sample size for Tebow, and still a small sample size for Bradford as well (one season), but besides completion percentage, I'm not sure Bradford did anything better than Tebow in his rookie season.
And again, I do not think that Tebow is a better QB or a better player than Bradford. I believe that Bradford is a promising young QB and with time, will be one of the top 10 QBs in the league. However, right now, it's a bit premature to group him with the likes of Tony Romo, Eli Manning, or any of the other mid to high 80's.
Edit: And to your point about 15 QBs that I would take over Bradford, there aren't 15. If I were starting a team, Bradford would probably be one of the top 10 QBs at least on my list of guys that I would want. But that's because of what Bradford can be, not because of what he is right now.
That's my main point. He had a great season for a rookie QB, but compared to other QBs in the league, it wasn't special, and certainly wasn't on the level of guys like Freeman, Romo, or Eli Manning. He shouldn't be given the rating based on what he can be, he should earn the rating based on what he's done, and he didn't do anything spectacular that year compared to the other starting QBs in the league.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding Tebow, as I've already pointed out, in his 3 starts, he put up a little over 280 yards per game, while Bradford put up somewhere around 215-220 per game if I recall correctly. Bradford scored 19 TDs in 16 games (just barely over 1 per game). Tebow scored 8 TDs in 3 starts (almost 3 TDs per game). Bradford had 15 interceptions and 7 fumbles in 16 games, so 22 possible turnovers (obviously some fumbles weren't lost), or a little under 1.5 turnovers per game. Tebow had 3 INTs and 1 fumble in 3 starts, so they turned it over at about the same rate, with Tebow turning it over just barely less. Tebow led as many 4th quarter comebacks in 3 starts (1) as Bradford did in his 16 starts, and Tebow's team averaged around 23 points per game in his 3 starts, compared to about 18 per game for Bradford and about 20 per game from Orton before he was benched for Tebow (just pointing out that Denver's offense performed better under Tebow so it wasn't just Tebow being in a better offense, which he was). Also, for what it's worth, ESPN's new QBR gave Tebow about a 54 (just barely above average), while Bradford was below average according to QBR. Obviously it was a very small sample size for Tebow, and still a small sample size for Bradford as well (one season), but besides completion percentage, I'm not sure Bradford did anything better than Tebow in his rookie season.
And again, I do not think that Tebow is a better QB or a better player than Bradford. I believe that Bradford is a promising young QB and with time, will be one of the top 10 QBs in the league. However, right now, it's a bit premature to group him with the likes of Tony Romo, Eli Manning, or any of the other mid to high 80's.
Edit: And to your point about 15 QBs that I would take over Bradford, there aren't 15. If I were starting a team, Bradford would probably be one of the top 10 QBs at least on my list of guys that I would want. But that's because of what Bradford can be, not because of what he is right now.
# 34
Yeah...THAT Guy @ 08/17/11 05:55 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 35
DeuceDouglas @ 08/17/11 08:29 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
2. Peyton Manning
3. Drew Brees
4. Aaron Rodgers
5. Philip Rivers
6. Ben Roethlisberger
7. Matt Ryan
8. Michael Vick
9. Matt Schaub
10. Joe Flacco
11. Josh Freeman
12. Matt Cassel
13. Matt Hasslebeck
14. Matthew Stafford
15. Eli Manning
16. Tony Romo
17. Kevin Kolb
There are more that are pretty borderline.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Just in case you need STATISTICAL confirmation.
http://hosted.stats.com/fb/playerstats.asp?id=23976
And for the record: I would rate Bradford at an 79-80 overall. There's no question that he took part in turning around a horrible team in a year. But nothing I saw convinced me that he is on the cusp of being elite. He has enormous potential but until either his coaches trust him to do more or St. Louis can get something that resembles a weapon, he will never reach that potential and will never be elite.
# 36
Yeah...THAT Guy @ 08/17/11 08:59 PM
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=9017
A good article that points out why Bradford's season was so overrated.
Note: The guy that wrote this later stated that he still thinks Bradford is a great young QB prospect, but he simply doesn't think any higher of him after his rookie season than he did when he left Oklahoma.
A good article that points out why Bradford's season was so overrated.
Note: The guy that wrote this later stated that he still thinks Bradford is a great young QB prospect, but he simply doesn't think any higher of him after his rookie season than he did when he left Oklahoma.
# 37
therockstar2005 @ 08/17/11 09:45 PM
Ok, so his season might be overrated, and his Madden rating might be overrated. I still think there's something to the supporting cast that needs to be considered, and I wouldn't say that statistics are everything for measuring a quarterback (a lot of what I would guess has gotten people high on Bradford is the intangibles - poise in the pocket, leadership on the field, that he actually stayed on the field for the whole season unlike some other quarterbacks, etc. - and that's not just in terms of Madden ratings), but fine, his season wasn't as glorious as some of us want to believe. If the Rams are gonna contend this year (which while hopeful I do doubt, our schedule could be really tough and the West is gonna be better than last year) they need to be able to throw downfield. It's definitely why we lost the Seattle game.
I'll still enjoy his 85 ovr Madden rating though, warranted or not. Certainly won't be the first Madden player who was somewhat overrated.
I'll still enjoy his 85 ovr Madden rating though, warranted or not. Certainly won't be the first Madden player who was somewhat overrated.
# 38
TeixeiraFanatic @ 08/17/11 10:00 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
In the two games each played against said teams, Bradford put up more passing yards 365 to Tebow's 343, the same amount of passing TDs (3), less interceptions (1) to (2), and a 57% comp to Tim's 46%.
Since the Rams did not play Houston last year, the worst pass defense Sam faced was the Washington Redskins (going by yards per game). Let's include Sam's stats against Washington and Tebow's stats against Houston.
Sam Bradford vs. Washington:
23-37, 62.2% comp, 235 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT
Tim Tebow vs. Houston:
16-29, 55.2% comp, 308 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT
With both of those games included their three game stats look like this.
Bradford
55-93, 59% comp, 600 yards, 4 TD, 2 INT
Tebow
40-81, 49% comp, 651 yards, 4 TD, 3 INT
As you can see, Tebow had 51 more yards in 15 less completions. That, in itself, is a pretty good yards per completion rating. Tebow played well in his three starts. I'm not debating that. And now that I have read up on these, it may look to a lot of people that Tebow had played better than Bradford. I'll be the first to say that I didn't know he did the well in his starts. But I'm the type of guy that likes high completion ratings because it means that you, as a quarterback, are putting the ball into the hands of your receivers and gaining yards. That might not mean that you're the best quarterback but you're doing what you need to do to win and at the end of the day winning is all that matters to these guys (for the most part). We'll have to wait until Tebow plays a whole year to really judge him as these three games maybe are not an indication of what kind of a player he will be. And I think we will see what Sam is made of in these first 6-8 games of the season this year.
Now I know that what started this whole thing was Sam's rating. It may seem a little high but how many of these stats are perfect? None. If you don't like it, change it when you get the game. That's why it's there.
# 39
PolkHigh33 @ 08/17/11 10:34 PM
Blah blah blah .. you guys are beating a dead horse ..
Ratings are subjective, change them if you don't agree ..
Ratings are subjective, change them if you don't agree ..
# 40
SoonerSports @ 08/18/11 05:21 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Well Bradford did always kick Mizzou's a$$
Post A Comment
Working...