Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Kiper just made a good point on Mike & Mike

Squirrel

By Squirrel,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Punisher Newbie

Punisher

Posted
Posted

Bradford had a much better oline

I posted the some stats. They were 25th, we were 27th. Yeah, he had a much better oline. It isn't officail but I put more faith in that than some random guy on the internet telling me the Rams have an awesome line.

and there is nothing close to Sam Bradford in the draft for 2010

Not sure what you are saying here. Noone isn't saying we should not have drafted Clausen though now it looks like we should not have.

The question was to name another rookie QB who saw success..blah blah

Yup. Questionable Oline play was one of the points. Rams gave up 40 sacks and had a team 3.81 rush avg.

Now tweak your answers with common sense or realize your answers do not, can not, will not fit the current Panther situation

Danny Amendola, Brandon Gibson with Danorio Alexander in the slot were the Rams starting recievers because of injuries to Donnie Avery and Mark Clayton. I think most Panthers fans would keep Steve Smith, Lafell, and Gettis over those three. Steve Smith looked legit when Matt Moore was in there. Gettis looked better when anyone but Clausen was in there. But lets all pretend here in Carolina a QB would not be able to show one sign of promise in this situation. The most promising thing about Clausen is if we start him all of next year, we will have the best shot at Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scpanther22 Rising Star

scpanther22

Posted
Posted

I am not going to argue whose O-Line is better. He just said questionable O-Line play.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

Hey look, they are the 25th ranked line compared to our 27th ranked line. They are beasts.

Their Oline was better.

The left tackle is charged with protecting a righthanded quarterback's blind side. According to STATS LLC, Saffold, 22, gave up just 3½ sacks and was penalized eight times, including six false starts, for 50 yards. Smith, 24, yielded four sacks and also was flagged for eight penalties, with five false starts, for 56 yards.

Bradford was sacked 34 times; only 13 teams gave up fewer. In 2009, the Rams yielded 44 sacks, which tied them for 25th in the league. The improvement in quarterback hits also was significant, to 78 (tied for 20th) this season from 98 (tied for 30th) in '09.

Those numbers are even more impressive when considering that Bradford threw 590 passes, compared with 543 by Rams QBs last season.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/article_1abae5d5-6724-510a-9263-1b4cf583c3b9.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scpanther22 Rising Star

scpanther22

Posted
Posted

nah, it is the David Carr principle. But a QB that plays like Clausen behind an OL and they will make it look much worse than it is in reality. Defenses know what Clausen will do w/ pressure therefore they bring the heat.

So when the Oline looked the same when we had other QB under center your excuse is_________?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Punisher Newbie

Punisher

Posted
Posted

Bradford had a much better oline and there is nothing close to Sam Bradford in the draft for 2010

The question was to name another rookie QB who saw success..blah blah

Now tweak your answers with common sense or realize your answers do not, can not, will not fit the current Panther situation

All it says is they improved.

44 sacks- 25th in the league

78 hits - tied for 20th

It doesn't even take into account that Bradford makes them look better than Clausen.

A bottom third O-line isn't questionable? I guess not if a 32nd ranked passing game isn't questioned either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Panther59 Newbie

Panther59

Posted
Posted

Went on a great rant of QB expectations and how it is unrealistic.

Yeah I saw that bit too, as I was leaving to go to work yesterday. Strange though, immediately after his rant was over, they started talking about the Ravens-Steelers game scheduled for today and Joe Flacco, who just happens to have led the Ravens to the playoffs in his rookie season...:crazy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scpanther22 Rising Star

scpanther22

Posted
Posted

All it says is they improved.

44 sacks- 25th in the league

78 hits - tied for 20th

It doesn't even take into account that Bradford makes them look better than Clausen.

A bottom third O-line isn't questionable? I guess not if a 32nd ranked passing game isn't questioned either.

Their Oline is better its not that hard to get..they have the #2 overall OT and a first round caliber OT in saffold..we had a UDFA starting at RT.

Sure Bradford/scheme make the line look good in a dink and dunk offense but their line play was still better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Punisher Newbie

Punisher

Posted
Posted

Their Oline is better its not that hard to get..they have the #2 overall OT and a first round caliber OT in saffold..we had a UDFA starting at RT.

Sure Bradford/scheme make the line look good in a dink and dunk offense but their line play was still better.

According to the stats you provided. They are bottom third in the league which is "questionable O-Line play". I said from the beginning, I wasn't going to argue who was better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carolinarolls Newbie

carolinarolls

Posted
Posted

too many incorrect comparisons are being made concerning Bradford, clausen and the olines. you cannot use stats here. sorry stat snugglers. you have to use some logical reasoning and make some mental comparisons on what you believe to be true and if that belief actually proves anything.

examples:

Sam and clausen rated about the same with their respective olines: proves nothing

Sam would be better with our oline than clausen would be with Sam's: proves nothing

Sam would be better/worse with our oline than Clausen was with it: closer but still a stretch and somewhat inconclusive

Sam is better with his oline than Sam is with ours: ding ding ding

sam's oline was better

/discussion

respectfully,

some random guy on the internet

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Punisher Newbie

Punisher

Posted
Posted

too many incorrect comparisons are being made concerning Bradford, clausen and the olines. you cannot use stats here. sorry stat snugglers. you have to use some logical reasoning and make some mental comparisons on what you believe to be true and if that belief actually proves anything.

examples:

Sam and clausen rated about the same with their respective olines: proves nothing

Sam would be better with our oline than clausen would be with Sam's: proves nothing

Sam would be better/worse with our oline than Clausen was with it: closer but still a stretch and somewhat inconclusive

Sam is better with his oline than Sam is with ours: ding ding ding

sam's oline was better

/discussion

respectfully,

some random guy on the internet

Sam being better with his oline than Sam is with ours doesn't prove that he doesn't have a questionable O-Line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...