Somehow still in first place.

Despite dropping to 6-8 with a loss to the AFC West leading Chiefs, things are still going according to plan for St. Louis. They lost to the Saints, and now lost to the Chiefs 27-13, but Seattle and San Francisco have been losing as well. Now, we're left with two "must win" games. Next weekend we try and deal the knock out blow to the 49'ers, and then in two weeks we look to steal the NFC West at 8-8 with a win over the Seahawks. After that, anything is possible (well, not really, but I'm a fan, and I have to say that).

Damn you, Matt Cassel. If you would have stayed out with your recovery from that appendectomy, we may have had a chance. Instead, you had to be a hero. The Rams started out strong, going up 6-0 after two semi-strong drives. But, we totaled 1 first down in the second quarter, and watched as the Chiefs put up 20 in a row on us. To start the second half, Steven Jackson led a thrilling drive that pulled us within 7, only to have Jamaal Charles go for an 80 yard run on the first play of the Chiefs next drive to seal the deal for the bad guys. It was kind of heart breaking, but we didn't really put up much of a fight.

Even though we went 6 for 17 on third downs, we finished with just 224 yards of total offense (-159 compared to KC). 9 penalties for 60 yards, 2 turnovers, and 3 sacks for -26 yards all added up to a seriously awful game for the Rams. Remember how I keep pointing out that Sam Bradford has the worst game of his career every week? Well, he did it again! Despite becoming just the third rookie in NFL history to pass for over 3,000 yards (which shows that if you just play a lot of games, you can reach milestones), Sam Brad finished this week 21/43 for 181 with 0 TDs and 2 INTs. Truly pathetic. Steven Jackson finished with 67 on the ground, while Danny Amendola tried his best with 60 on 7 through the air. On defense, it was Dockery getting a pick, Laurinaitis leading the team with 11 tackles, and Vobora and Hall getting a sack a piece. 

We're 6-8 with two games to go, and I'd say we're the odds on favorites to win the division. Incredible. Seattle is also at 6-8, with SF at 5-9, and Arizona at 4-10. Our -37 overall point differential (-2.6/game) is 20th in the NFL, our SRS is -6.6 (compared to the 0.0 average), and all this with a strength of schedule of -3.9 (again, with 0.0 being the average). However, and I've been preaching this all season, we are +4 on takeaway/giveaway, good enough for 10th in the league, and that is what's keeping us going. If you can call it that.

A lot of people, even non-Rams fans if you can believe it, tend to give me crap for not jumping on the Bradford bandwagon. I mean, look at how he's turned this team around! Of course, as I've pointed out, it is the Rams defense (a near average SRS of -0.7) that has made this team so much better. They deserve all the respect and credit for this possible division championship turnaround. But, if you still don't believe me on the Bradford issue, I'll turn to stats to make my point. 

First, I'll point out that Bradford is the ONLY Rams QB to throw a pass this year, which shows that he is durable. Right, so I'll definitely give him that, he deserves it. But, when we turn to Pro Football Reference's Advanced Passing Stats, we can easily show just how bad Bradford has been. They use indexed stats where a players numbers are put onto an index against every other QB in the league, and thus given a rating on said index. An index rating of 100 for any given stat is to be considered league average. Keep that in mind, it's important. And now, Sam Bradford's stat line (the "+" simply indicates that the stat is placed on the aforementioned index):

Yards/Attempt+: 81
Comp%+: 95
TD%+: 89
INT%+: 103
Sack%+: 105
QB Rat+: 91

As we see, Bradford is only above average (and only slightly so) in INT% and Sack%. INT% is the number of times you get picked off divided by pass attempts, and Sack% is the number of times you get sacked divided by pass attempts. You could argue that the offensive line has a good deal to do with both, but clearly they are the reason for the good Sack%. However, in every other category, Sam Brad is a below average QB. Not only is he going to be the worst QB in the playoffs, if we make it, but there are probably at least 5 QBs better than him who won't even make the playoffs. He just hasn't been that good. However, when you look at how this team has been over the previous 3 years, it's easy to see why Ram fans have a pocket rocket for the guy. 

But, just because we appreciate stats around here and want to be held to a higher standard than the jokers at ESPN who just make comments with nothing to back it up, here are the same stats for Marc Bulger averaged over those three horrible years:

Y/A+: 85
Comp%+: 88
TD%+: 82
INT%+: 98
Sack%+: 91
QBRat+: 85

Yeah, I think this helps it become perfectly clear why Rams fans are all on Brad's jock. When you have a guy playing so badly at QB for three years, even an upgrade that is still below average compared to the league looks like the next Joe Montana. And I'm not saying that because I think Sam Bradford is going to start pitching Sketchers any time soon. So, yes, Ram fans, I will admit that Bradford has been better than the previous three incarnations of the Rams starting QB. But, no, I refuse to be unrealistic when it comes to how good Bradford actually has been when compared to the average starting QBs in this league.

Next week's game against San Francisco is HUGE. Don't choke.

-- Sent from my Palm Prē