Bucs-Rams: For all the criticism of Kellen Clemens, that dude has been damn impressive all season ... clearly a good backup.
A few weeks ago, I remember you posted that Bradford should be finished as Rams QB, and now you are praising Clemens.
This is not meant to pick on you specifically, because i've been reading shit like this everywhere, including this forum. But it really drives me nuts that we still can't be sophisticated enough as fans to get past this idea that if you win, it must mean the QB played good, and if you lose, it must mean the QB did not play good and it's all his fault.
Sam Bradford's performance this year shits on Kellen Clemens. He's been so much better, that he not only shits on Clemens, he takes a big wet steaming pile of diarrhea on him.
Bradford (who people think should be run out of town): 227 YPG, 60.7%, 14 TD, 4 INT, 1.5% INT, 90.9 QBR
Clemens (who is playing "damn impressive", etc): 155 YPG, 54.7%, 7 TD, 5 INT, 2.6% INT, 78.4 QBR
Kellen Clemens stinks. He's been mediocre at best. The Rams clearly don't trust him with the ball, because in his four wins, he's averaged less than 20 attempts per game. In the wins, he's largely stayed out of the way while the running game & the defense have won games. But his shitty play has directly led to at least two losses.
The Rams struggled early on this season because they had zero running game with Daryl Richardson before Zac Stacy emerged, and it took the young WR's about a half season to settle into roles and figure out what they were doing. Tavon Austin didn't figure it out until after Bradford went down (including in the return game), and Stedman Bailey barely played until a few weeks ago. Austin had about 250 all purpose yards through the first 8 games, which is putrid when you consider he was returning all kicks & punts.
They aren't winning because of Clemens, they are winning in spite of him. He isn't playing well, and Bradford wasn't playing badly. It's actually the opposite.