Virgo-Pisces Alliance No.228: Why is Trent Dilfer Andrew Luck's biggest fan?

So, unless you have been under a rock for the past two years, you probably know the name of Andrew Luck.  You probably know that he is expected to the be the #1 over-all pick in the up-coming 2012 NFL Draft.  Unless something really unexpected happens, the Colts will take him and begin their rebuilding effort in verity & sooth.

I will blog about Jim Irsay's very interesting dilemma soon, but not this time.

One of the things football fans have noticed over the course of the past several months is that Andrew Luck has many advocates.  In fact, he has almost zero (0) detractors.

So far, only Phil Simms has risen in critique of Andrew Luck.  I have the greatest respect for Phil Simms, and I view him as one of the top-analysts of the game.  However, I think his critique of Andrew is off-base.  I just don't see it his way.  I just can't see on film what he claims to have seen on film.  When Phil says Andrew doesn't make NFL-type throws, I simply can't understand what he's talking about.  I've seen almost nothing but NFL-type throws out of the kid.  The weight of evidence is greatly against Phil.

Among all of the many advocates Andrew has, one stands out above all the rest.  That would be Trent Dilfer.  Trent Dilfer has said extraordinary things about Andrew.  Like what?  How about "Andrew Luck has no flaws".

Wow... that would make Andrew Luck perfect, now wouldn't it?  I rate the kid pretty dang high, but I would stop shy of perfect.  It's pretty clear that Trent doesn't shy away from that statement.  He believes Andrew will have the most glory-ladened career of all the young'ins coming up in the 2012 NFL Draft.  Trent really believes he is the perfect QB candidate.

It's to be expected.  Trent is a March 13, 1972 Pisces dude.  Andrew is a September 12, 1989 Virgo kid.  That's almost a perfect 180, folks.  The circular distance between March 13 and September 12 is almost exactly 180 degrees.  That is the most powerful angle for attraction, balance, and complementary.  Sirius 1.1 doesn't score them that high, but this is one of those false negatives I like to harp upon.  Looking at the two charts in comparison, I can see obvious things the scoring engine missed.  Dilfer likes Luck better than Sirius says.

Incidentally, Trent is birthday-buddies with my brother.  My brother is 3 years younger.  Once upon a time, I was Trent Dilfer's biggest advocate in the NFL Draft.  I was the leader of the Draft-Trent movement among the Ram fans back 1994.  I was so incandescently pissed-off  when my Rams failed to broker a deal in that draft that I literally took a couple of years off from football.  I knew we were going to suck.  1994-1998 were absolutely dreadful years, only exceeded by our recent stretch of time.  I maintain those would have been much better years if we had made a deal and selected Trent.  Our biggest problem in those days was the QB position.

If you have been keeping track of super-recent events, you know that a debate is emerging inside NFL business circles.  The question is simple.  Who is better:  Andrew Luck of Robert Griffin III?  This is natural occurrence.  We always have too much time on our hands this time of year, ergo we chew over questions and non-questions a thousand times.  Just a couple of months ago, this question would have been considered untenable.

I want to make some specific predictions about this coming debate:

1. It will rage on until draft day
2. RGIII's knee injury will not deter this debate.  Andrew had one also.
3. The Fire/Air Alliance will back RGIII
4. The Earth/Water Alliance will back Andrew Luck.
5. Mike Mayock is going to be torn.  He's next door to Andrew and 180 degrees away from RGIII.  He's going to struggle with this one.  I bet he loves both of these kids.
6. The same goes for Mel Kiper.
7. Todd McShay will side with RGIII
8. Trent Dilfer will continue to be Andrew Luck's biggest advocate.
9. Kurt Warner & Rich Eisen will side with Andrew Luck.

Learning to live with risk

Those reading this blog know I was never on board with the selection of Sam Bradford. I was against it all the way. To the very last instant, I was hoping for a trade announcement. Why so negative?

I felt drafting any QB #1 overall is an outrageous risk. Moreover, the natural risk is exacerbated by how poorly setup the Rams are to receive a fragile rookie QB. Our risk factors are higher than average, and average is pretty damn high already.

More specifically, I believed Sam would face the same fate as Marc did before him. Marc wasn't a bad guy. As I have said many times, we killed Marc Bulger. We let his OL dwindle to shit. We let his receiver corp dwindle to shit. Last year, we put Marc together with the worst offensive coordinator I have ever seen: Pat Shurmer. Now we are going to stick Sam Bradford in almost exactly that same shit.

Now does that sound like a good idea...?

And we are going to do so at the cost of $80 million. This is half an offshore oil drilling rig. This is the price of a modest Hollywood blockbuster. This will officially make Sam Bradford the highest paid Ram in history.

I used to laugh at teams who selected QBs #1 overall. A team fresh off of disaster elects a QB as their savior. A downtrodden fan base anoints this kid as the savior. Everyone hopes this will be the key player who is the linchpin of the next dynasty. They never seem to realize how seldom this works out in the end. The probability table is downright ugly.

If the kid will sign and play for you--which isn't always--he often gets hurt, or isn't good enough, or looses his confidence, or isn't serious enough to succeed. It will be the medical in Sam's case, if he doesn't pan out. When they don't go bust, the often turn into serviceable QBs who don't do much of anything spectacular. Look at Carson Palmer. Although he was selected #2 overall, look at Donovan McNabb. I always thought these poorboy franchises were foolish for going this route.

And now we have done it.

I spelled out the real risks in crass anatomical detail. I published them in high-traffic websites. I did everything possible to make this pick as uncomfortable as possible for Devaney. I was stone-cold ignored. He went and did anyway. When the pick came, it was like a wedding day celebration on national TV. It was clearly a joyous occasion for this administration. My heart was strangely warmed by this celebration. I was glad to see them make this pick with solid confidence. It gave me a very small modicum of confidence. 7 micrograms worth to be specific. Now what if they are fools?

Well, we did get one lineman and one receiver for him. I guess that's cold comfort.

The organization has taken a risk I have never witnessed in my lifetime. In 30 years of being a Ram fan, I have never seen the Rams do this. The last time we took a QB in the 1st round the year was 1964. This was something like 9 months before I would be conceived. We drafted Bill Munson from Utah State. He was not the absolute #1 either. That bust-o-matic bustola cured us. We would not take such a risk again for 46 years.

They stone-cold ignored me in several years when I wanted to take a Quarterback. I launched the "Draft Trent Dilfer" campaign at UCLA in 1994. The Rams gave me the middle finger. We fucked up. We stayed down low and selected Wayne Gandy from Alburn. He was a bust for us and the Steelers. Trent was a bust for the Bucs. He had to go elsewhere to succeed. I still contend that both Trent and the Rams would have had a much better time together than apart. We suffered without a QB for 5 years.

I was totally against Tony Banks and we saw what a tremendous bust he turned out to be. The only reason we don't mention him in the top 10 is because he was a 2nd round draft pick. This guy broke all records for fumbles and interceptions. He made Jake Del Homme look like a careful guy. The second we fired him, we won the Super Bowl. The second the Ravens fired Tony Banks (the very next year) they succeed us as World Champions.

Now when two teams that were struggling with you fire you and then immediately win the Super Bowl... in back-to-back years... Trent Dilfer succeed Banks in Baltimore. Don't you think we should have taken Dilfer instead of Banks in the 1990's?

FUCK!!!!

I hardly raised an eyebrow over the Trent Green acquisition. You never take a flier on somebody else's backup QB. Kansas City refuses to learn their lesson. Montana, Bono, Grbac, Green, Castle... they just keep doing it over and over again. Seattle will fair no better this season. Mark my words: Whitehurst is a stop gap insurance policy. Next year they are going to make a big move on Jake Locker. You never take a flier on somebody else's backup QB. This is why I was not big on the Trent Green trade.

In all fairness, Trent Green did show up big time for us in 2000. He was the NFL's highest rated passer that year. We immediately traded him. That was a mistake. I would still like to hire him as our offensive coordinator--if they won't hire Mike Leach--and sack Pat Shurmer.

I am usually not wrong about these Quarterback things. I have an instinct for it. I hate being right all the time. I am very hopeful that I am wrong about Sam and our organization... this time. However, I doubt it.

Devaney aught to know his ass is on the line. Spagnuolo is also on the line. If this doesn't work out, they are both dead meat. If it works, they are both geniuses, and everybody knew it all along.

I remember the scene when Governor Tarkin turns to Darth Vadar and says "This is an awful risk you're taking, Vadar." Vadar allowed the Millennium Falcon to escape with plans of the Death Star, knowing the the Rebs would take it to their main rebel base immediately. He planed to track them and destroy that rebel base-planet with the Death Star.

Let's just say it didn't work out. They blew the Death Star with a real bad call on that one.

Just picture me turning to Billy Devaney as Tarkin turned to Vadar and saying "This is an awful risk you're taking, Devaney."

My comments on the "Ram News" of the day

So I get an interesting piece of bacon mailed to my email box each morning. It's a news filter that tells me the major stories swirling about my Rams in each past 24 hour period. It seems to work well. There were so many fucked up reports in this morning's bacon, the intensity of the fuckedness was so great, that I felt the need to comment here.

Why the Rams should trade for Jason Campbell

What, are you crazy? You mean to tell me we should pass on Bradford in favor of Jason Campbell? Whilst I am not an advocate of taking Bradford, that has to be the most preposterous, ludicrous, observed proposition I have heard this season. Let me make it painfully clear: Jason Campbell has not been successful in this league. This is because he is the inverse of the gunslinger QB: He is a kid who is afraid to take a shot down field. He may have some athletic ability, but the fear factor will prevent him from ever succeeding in a clutch situation. There is a definitely lack of confidence and moxie in Campbell's constitution. That is why he's not a franchise QB.

I can completely understand why the Redskins would love to pawn him off on us, but this does not mean we should be stupid enough to take the deal. A small vote of confidence here for Sam: Given protection, Sam will be 5 to 10 times the QB Campbell is in the NFL. Never pass on Bradford for Campbell. That is a sure-fire looser.

Are the Rams thinking of trading down?

I hope so. The signals have it that we are still entertaining offers for the #1 pick. If a good deal presents itself, we should be ready to take it. I am still up for the notion of drafting a couple of offensive linemen and Tim Tebow. Notwithstanding Michael Lombardi's view that Tebow will creep up into the bottom of the 1st around.

You know me. I am one of Tebow's biggest advocates. Still, I don't see him reaching the 1st round. It would be an honor he deserves, but I have witnessed the tremendous bias against Spread and Spread-Option QBs in the NFL first hand. There is a knee-jerk, visceral reflex reaction against the notion of taking any Spread or Spread-Option QB high, and this applies no matter how good the kid is. As I write this, there are still many questioning Bradford's credentials because he comes from a Spread offense. I am amazed Bradford has overcome it to the extent he has.

I have also witnessed how powerful the bias is towards QBs who have been a Pro-System in college. So great is this bias that some folks are treating Mark Sanchez as the benchmark for rookie QBs now, and they are advocating Jimmy Clausen as a high first rounder. Both propositions strike me as preposterous. There was a 6 or 7 game stretch last season where Sanchez was awful and he look like a huge bust. The playoff run made people forgetful, but he did not enjoy a good rookie campaign. I have said many times that Clausen has "bust" tattooed on his forehead and everybody seems illiterate when around him. The Pro-System bias is real, it is tangible, it is powerful, and it is largely wrong.

Anyway, this is my short reasoning explaining why I doubt Tebow will make it to the 1st round. But I digress. In summary, I do hope we trade the pick, get a 2nd 2nd, and select Tebow.

With that said, I think the chances are remote. Many have evaluated this draft as I have. They believe the best QBs will be found in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Our chances for doing a deal hinge on finding someone who is in love with Ndamukong Suh and/or Gerald McCoy. I don't know that this will happen.

Not so fast, says the Rams' GM: No decision on the Heisman QB

Several pieces from the associated press and others synthesis in the following manner:

1. Do the Rams really want Bradford?
2. Why are they offering a trade if they do?
3. Devaney has stated fairly emphatically that releasing Mar Bulger (on his birthday) does not constitute a lock on Bradford at the #1 slot.
4. Bradford declares that he and his agent are totally in the dark about what the Rams want. They have not tipped their hand to him at all.
5. The Rams are negotiating with Bradford, but so too are they negotiating with Suh, McCoy and Clausen.
6. It is wretched to think so, but is reasonable to suppose that if the Rams still hold the #1 when the countdown commences, they may chose the cheapest bargain. This may boil down to a money deal.

With that said Bernie Miklasz of the St, Louis Post-Dispatch tried to explode this notion a piece he penned this morning. You can read it here. He basically says the following.

1. Stop the charade
2. You ain't fooling anybody
3. It's obvious you love Bradford
4. You've done everything shy of filing personal adoption papers in court.
5. You had better protect this kid with a good offensive line.
6. Upgrade the receivers
7. Don't rush Bradford
8. Put Pat Shurmer in charge of Bradford's development

Bernie is in St. Louis. He supposedly has access to the organization. So too does D'Marco Farr. Both of these guys have turned around lately and are saying all the signals are towards Bradford at this point. I am going to have to trust them on this, but from where I sit, here in Los Angeles, they look mighty indecisive and willing to reconsider.

I don't want to digress much here, but I would dismiss the Pat Shurmer notion. Why do you have any confidence in that guy? What Quarterback did he ever develop? Donovan McNabb? Please... he predated Shurmer by a long shot. Kolb? Nah, I don't accept that as positive case yet. If he shows strong like Rodgers, perhaps I will. I he does a great job with Bradford, perhaps I will.

Right now I want him fired, and I want Mike Leach in charge.

Rumors of Possible Haynesworth Trade Not Rumors

Is a trade for Haynesworth in the works for St. Louis? No, these are not rumors, just bullshit. John Clayton of ESPN threw that one out, supposedly... although I did not hear him do so on the air.

Look, Haynesworth is an over-paid prima donna who doesn't want to play nose tackle, although he did precisely this with the Titans. The guy did not perform well last season with the Redskins, and this is why they are shopping him. He isn't worth the $100m contract Snyder gave him; still one of the most preposterous moves I've seen in free agency. Several experts, including Mike Mayock, said he was a system player, who owed much of his greatness to the scheme he was in. They didn't think he would fair well away from Tennessee. Boy does that seem prescient now! Haynesworth did not do well away from Tennessee.

Now you have the complete task of explaining to me why the Rams, a team with cash-flow problems in the middle of an ownership change, would acquire a $45m expensive rookie QB and a $100m overpaid prima donna DT in the same season? The #1 pick is already described by many as a money-pit. Why complicate the situation by seeking Haynesworth's $100m contract also?

Are you stumped yet? So am I. I do not believe this plan is economically feasible for the Rams at this stage of the game. Ergo it is bullshit.

Dilfer says it would be a catastrophic mistake for the Rams to select Bradford

My home-boy Trent Dilfer was asked to comment on Devaney's statement that selecting Bradford is no sure-thing. Dilfer applauded this comment, and made a few controversial statements. What were they?

1. Bradford is not close to being the #1 athlete in this draft. I would accept that statement.
2. Bradford faced a lot of soft defenses in the Big-12. It is an interesting point. In the 2009 BCS game he faced a hard-ass SEC defense in Florida, and put 14 points on the board, not 60.
3. Clausen is the most pro-ready. Ooopss! I knew he had to fuck up somewhere. Trent, quit injecting Fentanyl into your veins. Don't make me send you to rehab. Come out of narcotic induced delusions and read the tattoo on Clausen's forehead that says "BUST". I am telling you now that this kid is never going to make it in the NFL. You will all be scratching you heads in a few years saying "What happened?" You criteria is wrong. The pro-system doesn't predict shit. It is a meaningless indication of nothing in particular.
4. Colt McCoy may be the kid who winds up having the best pro career. It is an interesting idea. I have mulled that notion over several times. Colt looks damn good to me. I am still betting on Tebow, but my secondary bet is on McCoy. Implicit within this declaration is the notion that the pro-system is a meaningless indication of nothing in particular. Colt is a spread QB.

I don't agree with Trent's somewhat hysterical use of the term 'Catastrophic'. I do believe Bradford will become a great passer... give a steel-reinforced concrete offensive line like that of the Jets. We do not have such a line, ergo we run the risk of making him a medical bust. Even in Bernie's article, I still see major cases of denial about the state of our offensive line, which is still 3 players away from being solid. Bradford is a terrific kid, but with such poor protection, he is in for great difficulty.