Official Sam Bradford - QB (2 Viewers)

[Tool]

Cue the hackneyed, cliched, he did it on volume with an ultra-low Y/A average refrain.

There is nothing anybody can say that is going to change minds, until Bradford stays healthy, has an unambiguously good season, improves his completion percentage, raises his Y/A average and WINS. Than it won't be necessary to talk about it, changed minds will happen spontaneously.

Are you sure you know who has to change their minds?

I don't know where or in which direction individual molecules move, but gather that Brownian motion occurs in general.

If he does better (healthy, higher completion precentage and Y/A average, wins more) in better circumstances, he will predictably be better thought of, independently of the better circumstances in many cases. Converesely, if he doesn't, he won't. Not a controversial suggestion to the thread.

* Some people may not have changed their mind that the Rams don't have better WRs than the Packers, but that is such a fringe position that it is irrelevant.

Sanchez improved on all of his career numbers in Phili but is still not better thought of (except for some of his playoff metrics which he gets little credit for too).

I think most people's impression of sanchez has improved after last year. I guess i can only speak for myself but my impression went from thinking he was pretty bad to thinking he can be competent in the right circumstances. I do think he's one of if not the best backups in the league.

 

[Insein]

We need an automatic posting of "if he stays healthy" before any post in this thread.

 

[Chaka]

Cue the hackneyed, cliched, he did it on volume with an ultra-low Y/A average refrain.

There is nothing anybody can say that is going to change minds, until Bradford stays healthy, has an unambiguously good season, improves his completion percentage, raises his Y/A average and WINS. Than it won't be necessary to talk about it, changed minds will happen spontaneously.

Are you sure you know who has to change their minds?

I don't know where or in which direction individual molecules move, but gather that Brownian motion occurs in general.

If he does better (healthy, higher completion precentage and Y/A average, wins more) in better circumstances, he will predictably be better thought of, independently of the better circumstances in many cases. Converesely, if he doesn't, he won't. Not a controversial suggestion to the thread.

* Some people may not have changed their mind that the Rams don't have better WRs than the Packers, but that is such a fringe position that it is irrelevant.

Sanchez improved on all of his career numbers in Phili but is still not better thought of (except for some of his playoff metrics which he gets little credit for too).

You are leaving out some important contextual, situational information (which coincidentally was a pattern and theme of the previous debates, and let me be clear, I'm speaking in general, not you specifically, in the previous debate context and reference - The Rams WRs are just as good as GBs [[suuurrreee they are]], ignoring that in 2011, PFF or Football Outsiders called the Rams the most injured offense and/or team of the decade, little things like that).

If Chip Kelly had not traded for Bradford and instead stated categorically Sanchez is the starter over Foles, probably he would be better thought of. But Kelly did trade for Bradford. Which negatively impacts the consensus perception or impression or Sanchez, in a way that wouldn't be there if he was generally thought of as PHIs defacto starter. In a way, you could maybe say, since many aren't too keen on Bradford, rightly or wrongly in their interpretation, from that perspective, the fact that Kelly chose Bradford over Sanchez is an implicit indictment of his talent (or lack thereof - again, from that perspective). I concede your point could be well taken if this was the case last year, before the trade (but I was responding to your use of the word is, not was, present and not past tense) . But I think an element of what I have brought up also exists and is relevant to the conversation.

My subjective take is at one time earlier in his career, there was some hope and promise attached to Sanchez based on the aforementioned playoff numbers (Flacco came up at the same time, also had great playoff success early, maybe even at an NFL record level for a young QB, but seems to be a better example of generally being perceived as fulfilling that early potential). In some ways the "consensus" has a short memory, doesn't commonly include data from much more than 1-2 years ago and (imo, to reiterate) is very sensitive to *TRAJECTORY* and career direction. I think there was a sense he didn't take the next step, which can easily become entrenched into thinking he won't or can't take the next step (maybe disappointment has a lag time?). Sometimes QB imports like Plunkett and Gannon (to use a few Raiders examples) underwhelmed early but nonetheless evolved into really good QBs later in their career. But realistically, this probably happens far less than the opposite case, a continuation of the prior trend line. Maybe Sanchez will be the exception?

A good test, if somebody genuinely thinks he is as good or better than Bradford, you can probably get him pretty cheap, and if he does emerge as the starter, could become a lot more valuable, as someone should be putting up numbers in that offense.

Don't you frequently dismiss important contextual information regarding Bradford.

And what is your subjective take on Bradford's career trajectory? When has he ever taken a next step?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I think people are over arguing the points about his talent (yes I know that sounds odd). This looks like a classic example of a player going from a mediocre situation, especially his coaches and systems in StL, to a fantastic one in Philly. His staying healthy will be the biggest FF risk with him.

 

[Insein]

I'd say he plays 14 games, has 3900-28tds-10ints.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Based off of some of the overall numbers the Eagles has last year and Bradford's historical numbers with slight upticks based on better situation in Philly I would project:

16 games (if healthy)

600 attempts

4200 yards (7.0 y/a)

30 TDs (5.0 TD%)

9 INTs (1.5 INT%)

 

[Bri]

Based off of some of the overall numbers the Eagles has last year and Bradford's historical numbers with slight upticks based on better situation in Philly I would project:

16 games (if healthy)

600 attempts

4200 yards (7.0 y/a)

30 TDs (5.0 TD%)

9 INTs (1.5 INT%)

I like this one. It's not far off 2013 and 2014 Eagles #s but I don't think he starts til week four.

This minus 25% for me

I think his OU days are going to make him comfy in Kelly's offense real quick. His comfort (a zillion OCs in short career with few talented WRs) is a big deal IMO, a real difference maker in how people see him on the field and his future in the league.

 

[Tau837]

Based on stuff I have read, Bradford is not yet close to 100%. Is it guaranteed he will get there by the start of the season?

If he does, is it guaranteed that he will start over Sanchez?

 

[Bri]

Based on stuff I have read, Bradford is not yet close to 100%. Is it guaranteed he will get there by the start of the season?

If he does, is it guaranteed that he will start over Sanchez?

that's why I'm thinking week 4.

As far as sanchez, I think it's blue chip versus not. Chip will go with prime rib

 

[TDorBust]

Where is all this Sanchez love coming from all of a sudden? Everyone hated Sanchez and thought he was worthless now they think he is a great QB who will hold of a QB that Chip actively acquired. I think Sanchez is average at best and when Bradford is healthy he will be put in as starter. The only way I dont see this happening is if Bradford is not ready to go week 1 and Sanchez is 4-0 going into week 5 when Bradford is fully healthy.

In the end doubt Bradford is not starting for the Eagles by the time he is healthy and at 99%. I am hopeful this is during the preseason so there is no doubt but could see it taking a touch longer.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Based on stuff I have read, Bradford is not yet close to 100%. Is it guaranteed he will get there by the start of the season?

If he does, is it guaranteed that he will start over Sanchez?

Chip Kelly said he is throwing 7 on 7 this week and that he is on schedule from the timetable they had (assuming when the trade was made) which would put Bradford being able to participate in training camp. Not sure when he'll be cleared for full contact, but better safe than sorry. As far as Sanchez goes, you don't trade draft picks for a player on a 1 year deal and then sit him behind Sanchez.

 

[Tau837]

Based on stuff I have read, Bradford is not yet close to 100%. Is it guaranteed he will get there by the start of the season?

If he does, is it guaranteed that he will start over Sanchez?

Chip Kelly said he is throwing 7 on 7 this week and that he is on schedule from the timetable they had (assuming when the trade was made) which would put Bradford being able to participate in training camp. Not sure when he'll be cleared for full contact, but better safe than sorry. As far as Sanchez goes, you don't trade draft picks for a player on a 1 year deal and then sit him behind Sanchez.

Are you saying that if Bradford is healthy but Sanchez outplays him in training camp and preseason that Chip will play Bradford anyway?

Or are you saying there is no possibility that Sanchez will outplay Bradford if Bradford is healthy?

Note: I'm not saying I believe Sanchez will win the job. Just asking questions.

 

[ShaHBucks]

Based on stuff I have read, Bradford is not yet close to 100%. Is it guaranteed he will get there by the start of the season?

If he does, is it guaranteed that he will start over Sanchez?

Chip Kelly said he is throwing 7 on 7 this week and that he is on schedule from the timetable they had (assuming when the trade was made) which would put Bradford being able to participate in training camp. Not sure when he'll be cleared for full contact, but better safe than sorry. As far as Sanchez goes, you don't trade draft picks for a player on a 1 year deal and then sit him behind Sanchez.

Are you saying that if Bradford is healthy but Sanchez outplays him in training camp and preseason that Chip will play Bradford anyway?

Or are you saying there is no possibility that Sanchez will outplay Bradford if Bradford is healthy?

Note: I'm not saying I believe Sanchez will win the job. Just asking questions.

Sanchez and Barkley outplayed Foles last preseason. Ignore the coach speak. Chip gave up a starting QB, 11m+ in cap, and drafts picks to have Bradford. Follow the money.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Based on stuff I have read, Bradford is not yet close to 100%. Is it guaranteed he will get there by the start of the season?

If he does, is it guaranteed that he will start over Sanchez?

Chip Kelly said he is throwing 7 on 7 this week and that he is on schedule from the timetable they had (assuming when the trade was made) which would put Bradford being able to participate in training camp. Not sure when he'll be cleared for full contact, but better safe than sorry. As far as Sanchez goes, you don't trade draft picks for a player on a 1 year deal and then sit him behind Sanchez.

Are you saying that if Bradford is healthy but Sanchez outplays him in training camp and preseason that Chip will play Bradford anyway?

Or are you saying there is no possibility that Sanchez will outplay Bradford if Bradford is healthy?

Note: I'm not saying I believe Sanchez will win the job. Just asking questions.

Sanchez and Barkley outplayed Foles last preseason. Ignore the coach speak. Chip gave up a starting QB, 11m+ in cap, and drafts picks to have Bradford. Follow the money.

What ShaHBucks said. Bradford has to lose the starting job, not win it.

 

[Late225]

I recall Foles being on pace to be a top 4/5 fantasy quarterback in 2013. He was drafted somewhere 8-10 in fantasy drafts.

If Bradford can stay healthy, he should be able to put up top 5 quarterback numbers. This assumes the pass/run ratio is the same as last year.

I'm on the Eagles message board a lot, and doctors have said that when you have 1 torn ACL, you are at risk for a second. However, when you have 2 torn ACLs, you are not at an increased risk for a third. It's actually a higher percentage likelihood you tear a second ACL after a first, then tearing a third ACL after a second. I don't understand how that works, but that's what a few doctors have mentioned on the boards. I'd love to hear Jene weigh in at some point.

I think Bradford is a buy. He's a bargain in redraft leagues, and while only 27, he's a steal in fantasy leagues.

The downside is that there is some speculation that the Eagles will run a higher percentage of plays this year. They ran a lot of run plays last year, so I'm not too concerned about it.

 

[Chaka]

Bradford splitting first team reps with Sanchez

Good sign for Bradford's recovery schedule.

 

[Bri]

Bradford is participating in 7 on 7 as per a zillion guys on twitter.

I'm curious what they'll say about his legs after the practice

 

[Boone22]

Bradford is participating in 7 on 7 as per a zillion guys on twitter.

I'm curious what they'll say about his legs after the practice

I heard that the leg fell off after practice but they had some duct tape available so it's all good.

 

[Bri]

instead of the retired (?) Daryl Richardson, etc.

Jets curiously have both he and Stacy

 

[Warrior]

Is it guaranteed he will get there by the start of the season?

Of course not.

 

[dhockster]

Bradford is participating in 7 on 7 as per a zillion guys on twitter.

I'm curious what they'll say about his legs after the practice

I heard that the leg fell off after practice but they had some duct tape available so it's all good.

Duct tape can be used for anything. It's awesome.

 

[voiceofunreason]

(By bringing up some of the earlier talking points, I'm not implying any were yours, just addressing some of the more common ones that came up, as possible examples and evidence of either dismissiveness or inclusiveness of contextual information, from both sides of the debate).

Again, I don't have interest in debating semantics. There are stats and context to stats. I don't recall saying his stats were great, just tried to give context to them. I haven't ignored his injuries, which is why I've phrased much of this recent exchange conditionally.

I thought before and still do, that inheriting and being part of such a bad team early in his career is relevant context and shouldn't be ignored.

Or that the 2011 Rams were called the most injured team of the decade is similarly relevant context and shouldn't be ignored.

If anybody thought STL had better WRs than GB, than I would say they were the ones with the questionable sense of context.

I imagine I think somewhat like Kelly, in the sense of thinking Bradford could be capable of doing better, in better circumstances, for instance, with a team coming off consecutive 10-6 seasons, with a more offensive-minded and passing oriented HC, with a better OL, being able to hand it off to DeMarco Murray instead of the retired (?) Daryl Richardson, etc.

I'm not sure what you are looking for in the two years since we last talked about it? Not much to highlight with consecutive season-ending injuries since then. My subjective take on his career trajectory is it was enhanced when Kelly traded for him. He might be the single best HC he could possibly go to in the way of boosting production from former levels. If he plays this season, he is likely to improve completion percentage, Y/A, W/L record, etc. My subjective take is that if he does better in better circusmtances, people will probably think he is better (apart from the circumstances).

Back to your earlier question, I think it is the fact that Kelly handpicked Bradford in a trade to likely start over Sanchez, and the fact that many aren't high on Bradford, has negatively impacted on the general impression of Sanchez to be a starter. If you agree, not sure what the point is here? If you don't agree (in which case, are you suggesting these things have nothing to do with each other?), I don't know what I can add here, we'll just have to disagree.

* Hypothetically, lets say you were the owner of Blake Bortles (playing one year he isn't conclusively good, bad or anything, it is too early to tell). If you had your choice for places to be a starter (and have a better opportunity to make a positive impression in that first season), would you rather he go to a team exactly like the Rams in 2010, or the Eagles in 2015? If the answer is the latter, than you are attending to what I call context, and accounting for it, completely the opposite of dismissing it.

But if you would like to explain how you would rather Bortles go to a team exactly like the 2010 Rams instead of the 2015 Eagles, and think he would have a greater chance of thriving and fluorishing there, have at it. Otherwise, perhaps you don't disagree, in which case, again, you are kind of making my point about context for me.

** I think I was pretty consistent in acknowledging if his completion percentage and Y/A average didn't go up given potential future better circumstances, that would be a troubling sign for his development, so not a case of dismissing context there. I recall his stats at the time he went down near mid-season of the 2013 season, especially prorations that came up with a 33/13 TD/INT ratio, as being contentious. I wouldn't say I dismissed the opinions of others that they were historical outliers based on percentage of pass/rush TDs at that juncture of the season, in the sense of refusing to even acknowledge or consider it. Clearly they were, to an extent. Just that one of the main points to me was that he had improved weapons and OL stability in 2013, so he might have been expected to do better. Also, that he deserved some credit for putting the offense in position to score, even if the mix would typically involve more rushing TDs. So on the basis of those points and others, it didn't make sense to completely ignore the improvement, and pretend it didn't happen. I'll leave that to the thread to figure out which side was being more dismissive or inclusive of contextual information, in that case. If you emphasize his actual 2013 numbers and "dismiss" the outlier status, that is "dismissive" from one perspective. If you emphasize the outlier status and dismiss his actual 2013 numbers, that is "dismissive" from another vantage point. So one moral is, if somebody is determined to say you are dismissive, they probably can find material to interpret the evidence in that way no matter what.

Health was another contentious issue. It is unclear to me, how a college shoulder injury and second pro season lingering high ankle sprain would have predicted consecutive torn ACLs in 2013 and 2014? I certainly don't recall anybody making that specific prediction at that time, so not sure if that could be construed as a case of dismissing context. But we could alway probe alleged psychic hotline injury prediction prowess BEFORE the injuries occur, if others want to play that game. Make a list in advance of which players are going to have torn ACLs this season. When will they happen? Did anybody earlier predict Fowler, Heuerman or Clady?

I never thought it made sense to pin W-L record 100% on any player, and to do so, imo, is a more egregious example of dismissing context (i.e. - that it is a team sport, there are 21 other starters on offense and defense). Saying Manning, Brady and Rodgers were more individually impactful on the W-L records of their respective teams was always for me a red herring and straw man, since Bradford doesn't need to be as good as them to have upside. It isn't mutually exclusive that he could not be one of the greatest QBs in NFL history, but still capable of doing better and being more productive in better circumstances.

Fortunately you started another thread. Clearly this needs to be expanded upon.

 

[Bri]

Like I said, he is the king of first impressions. There's several articles about how pretty a pass he throws and he only played the first half of practice. Jordan Matthews "the kid can throw the ball" quote has been used all over.

As is the case with Sam, this will wear off, and we need to see how effective these pretty passes can be.

This NJ.com article is contrary to the sentiment out there, but it is the first time in 2015 I've read someone say Sam's feet look good

http://www.nj.com/eagles/index.ssf/2015/06/how_kiko_alonso_demarco_murray_and_other_new_eagle.html

It's one guy's opinion, but it's a start. More articles like that will be a relief to Bradford fans

 

[Bri]

Based on stuff I have read, Bradford is not yet close to 100%. Is it guaranteed he will get there by the start of the season?

If he does, is it guaranteed that he will start over Sanchez?

Chip Kelly said he is throwing 7 on 7 this week and that he is on schedule from the timetable they had (assuming when the trade was made) which would put Bradford being able to participate in training camp. Not sure when he'll be cleared for full contact, but better safe than sorry. As far as Sanchez goes, you don't trade draft picks for a player on a 1 year deal and then sit him behind Sanchez.

Are you saying that if Bradford is healthy but Sanchez outplays him in training camp and preseason that Chip will play Bradford anyway?

Or are you saying there is no possibility that Sanchez will outplay Bradford if Bradford is healthy?

Note: I'm not saying I believe Sanchez will win the job. Just asking questions.

Sanchez and Barkley outplayed Foles last preseason. Ignore the coach speak. Chip gave up a starting QB, 11m+ in cap, and drafts picks to have Bradford. Follow the money.

Also the OC wanted Sam and was flat out giddy to get him

 

[Bri]

The downside is that there is some speculation that the Eagles will run a higher percentage of plays this year. They ran a lot of run plays last year, so I'm not too concerned about it.

I'm wondering how much Mathis staying or going impacts this

 

[Faust]

Eagles Practice Observations: Agholor impresses; Bradford more mobile; Kiko and Kendricks together

Excerpt:

Good news on the Sam Bradford front and his recovery from an ACL injury. He continued to progress in terms of how much he did in practice and looked a little more mobile than he had in the first two weeks of OTAs. Bradford told reporters after practice that he still couldn’t definitively say that he would be 100 percent ready for the start of training camp.

He remained tentative with his steps during seven-on-seven drills – he sat out team drills again -- but Bradford took more snaps than he did last Tuesday (the last time the media was permitted to attend practice). His throws were mostly sharp. His best pass was a 30-yard beauty to tight end Zach Ertz down the seam.

 

[Bri]

A lot of tweets saying Bradford said it feels like Oklahoma offense

 

[Faust]

Jason La Canfora ‏@JasonLaCanfora

Sam Bradford clearly still working his way back. Has looked lumbering at times. Not taking part in 11on11s late in practice as of yet

 

[Amused to Death]

Here are 10 observations from Tuesday's practice:

1. Sam Bradford: Bradford handled his normal workload on Tuesday, stretching with the entire team and then taking part in some seven-on-seven drills. If nothing else it is a positive sign that as his workload has increased, while minimally, he has not suffered any setbacks.

Bradford wasn't particularly sharp on Tuesday during the team drills. During one rep, his throw over the middle was too low and into the ground. On another, he checked it down to a running back. After shining on Monday, there wasn't much to take away from Bradford on Tuesday.

 

[DaveL]

Here are 10 observations from Tuesday's practice:

1. Sam Bradford: Bradford handled his normal workload on Tuesday, stretching with the entire team and then taking part in some seven-on-seven drills. If nothing else it is a positive sign that as his workload has increased, while minimally, he has not suffered any setbacks.

Bradford wasn't particularly sharp on Tuesday during the team drills. During one rep, his throw over the middle was too low and into the ground. On another, he checked it down to a running back. After shining on Monday, there wasn't much to take away from Bradford on Tuesday.

is that not allowed or something?

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Here are 10 observations from Tuesday's practice:

1. Sam Bradford: Bradford handled his normal workload on Tuesday, stretching with the entire team and then taking part in some seven-on-seven drills. If nothing else it is a positive sign that as his workload has increased, while minimally, he has not suffered any setbacks.

Bradford wasn't particularly sharp on Tuesday during the team drills. During one rep, his throw over the middle was too low and into the ground. On another, he checked it down to a running back. After shining on Monday, there wasn't much to take away from Bradford on Tuesday.

is that not allowed or something?

You have to really take the OTA reports with a grain of salt

 

[Bri]

Here are 10 observations from Tuesday's practice:

1. Sam Bradford: Bradford handled his normal workload on Tuesday, stretching with the entire team and then taking part in some seven-on-seven drills. If nothing else it is a positive sign that as his workload has increased, while minimally, he has not suffered any setbacks.

Bradford wasn't particularly sharp on Tuesday during the team drills. During one rep, his throw over the middle was too low and into the ground. On another, he checked it down to a running back. After shining on Monday, there wasn't much to take away from Bradford on Tuesday.

is that not allowed or something?

Something had to bring attention to it to get the reporter to notice. I'd guess someone was open and instead he checked down.

That's the first time he's stretched with the team I think (not with trainer) so that's positive.

People on twitter still gawking at his pretty passes.

I'm antsy for some live action

 

[Faust]

Zach Ertz: Sam Bradford puts ball 'wherever he wants'

 

[ShaHBucks]

Here are 10 observations from Tuesday's practice:

1. Sam Bradford: Bradford handled his normal workload on Tuesday, stretching with the entire team and then taking part in some seven-on-seven drills. If nothing else it is a positive sign that as his workload has increased, while minimally, he has not suffered any setbacks.

Bradford wasn't particularly sharp on Tuesday during the team drills. During one rep, his throw over the middle was too low and into the ground. On another, he checked it down to a running back. After shining on Monday, there wasn't much to take away from Bradford on Tuesday.

is that not allowed or something?

just not if you're Nick Foles and you have D. Sproles at your disposal.

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Sam Bradford (ACL) remained limited to 7-on-7 work Tuesday.

Unlike fellow ACL patient Carson Palmer, Bradford hasn't graduated to 11-on-11 work yet. There have also been whispers that he remains hobbled and is limping around -- observations that have been discounted by other reporters. When asked if Bradford will be ready for 11-on-11 when training camp opens, Chip Kelly said, "God, we hope so."

Related: Mark Sanchez

Source: Geoff Mosher on Twitter
Jun 16 - 11:18 AM

 

[Bri]

Zach Ertz: Sam Bradford puts ball 'wherever he wants'

FBG email had another article where Ertz praised Bradford again.

If this offense is at all similar to OU, (he said it feels like it or somesuch) then Ertz is going to have a very nice year. Gresham got so much work with the Sooners and the Titans (Fisher) used the TE so much, that there were high hopes for Jared Cook when he joined Bradford in STL.

 

[Bri]

I understand how in physical therapy you want to shed that brace and be able to move around comfortably without it.

What I've wondered about Sam is, now for the second time, why not be one of those guys that wears a brace? We are talking about millions of dollars and a fun career

 

[Bushead]

I understand how in physical therapy you want to shed that brace and be able to move around comfortably without it.

What I've wondered about Sam is, now for the second time, why not be one of those guys that wears a brace? We are talking about millions of dollars and a fun career

From what i have read, both his MCL and ACL tears came while wearing a brace - so he probably doesn't feel it has been very helpful avoiding injury in the past

 

[Faust]

Sam Bradford confident he'll be set for training camp

 

[Bri]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

 

[Tool]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

Personlly i do not. I would want someone better and a higher floor to pair w/ Bradford. That's not a knock on mariotta, just as a rookie he's a wild card. And bradford is a big time wild card.

 

[Chaka]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

Titans have a week four bye. What odds is Vegas offering that Bradford lasts that long?

 

[Juzaba]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

If you're looking for a late QB combo, I'd go Bradford/Cutler or Bradford/Palmer. Both of those guys are available late and will offer less variance in games that they start.

 

[voiceofunreason]

Much as I've been a Bradford hater, I think he's way underrated right now. No matter what chump the Eagles have put on the field, they've put up huge numbers. Bradford can be that chump this year. I also think injuries are mainly a result of luck. Stafford had the same image, Aaron Rodgers as well.

 

[Bri]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

Personlly i do not. I would want someone better and a higher floor to pair w/ Bradford. That's not a knock on mariotta, just as a rookie he's a wild card. And bradford is a big time wild card.

I like the running. I'm always gullible for the running QB in FF. I've been hopeful bad rookie games could be overcome(FF wise) by some decent rushing stats added in. Usually that's a fair prediction with rookie QBs as they panic N run more during bad games.

http://fantasyfootballcalculator.com/adp.php?format=standard&year=2015&teams=12&view=graph&pos=qb

I imagine people would say Carson (both ACLs odd I know but...) is a better risk a round later than Bradford, but I really think he'll do well in Philly.

If you had to go two after 15/11 on this list, which two?

I love my RBs, WRs, TEs when I've done this in mocks, so that's why I'm trying to push this for now.

 

[Bri]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

If you're looking for a late QB combo, I'd go Bradford/Cutler or Bradford/Palmer. Both of those guys are available late and will offer less variance in games that they start.

Can't stand Cutler, been burned type thing. Maybe I need to rethink that.

I have yet to be able to get Bradford and Carson in a draft. When you're late with the QBs, a run is triggered too easily. I think I'd have to be around a corner to pull that off

 

[Bri]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

Titans have a week four bye. What odds is Vegas offering that Bradford lasts that long?

Well if you have this thinking, you're not picking Bradford.

I'm not going to say you're wrong for thinking so or anything but no one is drafting a player for 4 weeks.

 

[Chaka]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

Titans have a week four bye. What odds is Vegas offering that Bradford lasts that long?

Well if you have this thinking, you're not picking Bradford.

I'm not going to say you're wrong for thinking so or anything but no one is drafting a player for 4 weeks.

Point being is if you draft a guy like Bradford you darn well better make sure you have a more reliable backup than a rookie on a bad team. Those in super-flex or 2-QB leagues will need to pay a premium for Sanchez kind of diminishing the value of getting Bradford late. Honestly all Bradford owners need to strongly consider picking up Sanchez.

 

[Tool]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

Personlly i do not. I would want someone better and a higher floor to pair w/ Bradford. That's not a knock on mariotta, just as a rookie he's a wild card. And bradford is a big time wild card.

I like the running. I'm always gullible for the running QB in FF. I've been hopeful bad rookie games could be overcome(FF wise) by some decent rushing stats added in. Usually that's a fair prediction with rookie QBs as they panic N run more during bad games.

http://fantasyfootballcalculator.com/adp.php?format=standard&year=2015&teams=12&view=graph&pos=qb

I imagine people would say Carson (both ACLs odd I know but...) is a better risk a round later than Bradford, but I really think he'll do well in Philly.

If you had to go two after 15/11 on this list, which two?

I love my RBs, WRs, TEs when I've done this in mocks, so that's why I'm trying to push this for now.

i would prefer the Bradford / Flacco combo. Flacco gives the stability and then you've got Bradford as a roll of the dice. And agree on making sure you get sanchez. Of course, that may depend on roster size to some extent.

 

[Chaka]

In a league where most QBs get drafted so ya gotta have two because you know the WW will be sparse...

Do you think Bradford/Mariani combo is a good idea?

I'm a fan of Bradford and the Titans so I'm fighting homerism. They're both available late enough to really make this appealing to me

Personlly i do not. I would want someone better and a higher floor to pair w/ Bradford. That's not a knock on mariotta, just as a rookie he's a wild card. And bradford is a big time wild card.

I like the running. I'm always gullible for the running QB in FF. I've been hopeful bad rookie games could be overcome(FF wise) by some decent rushing stats added in. Usually that's a fair prediction with rookie QBs as they panic N run more during bad games.

http://fantasyfootballcalculator.com/adp.php?format=standard&year=2015&teams=12&view=graph&pos=qb

I imagine people would say Carson (both ACLs odd I know but...) is a better risk a round later than Bradford, but I really think he'll do well in Philly.

If you had to go two after 15/11 on this list, which two?

I love my RBs, WRs, TEs when I've done this in mocks, so that's why I'm trying to push this for now.

i would prefer the Bradford / Flacco combo. Flacco gives the stability and then you've got Bradford as a roll of the dice. And agree on making sure you get sanchez. Of course, that may depend on roster size to some extent.

And that is a very big issue for most people. If Bradford hits and plays 16 then you're thrilled but you're also wasting a precious roster spot on a player who provides no value beyond peace of mind.

Regardless of ability Bradford represents a complicated proposition, more so than most other QBs.