Thread: Issac Bruce to retire a Ram

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d81888ce8&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Another of the great receivers of this era hangs it up. I truly enjoyed watching him play the game, him and Holt together made quite the tandem.

He finishes his career ahead of Carter in yards, and fifth all-time in receptions. The HOF discussion is going to get quite receiver heavy in the next few years as all these big-name receivers from the 90's start retiring. Guys like Harrison, Holt, Moss, TO, Bruce, Rod Smith, Reed, etc.

i_bleed_purple wrote:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d81888ce8&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Another of the great receivers of this era hangs it up. I truly enjoyed watching him play the game, him and Holt together made quite the tandem.

He finishes his career ahead of Carter in yards, and fifth all-time in receptions. The HOF discussion is going to get quite receiver heavy in the next few years as all these big-name receivers from the 90's start retiring. Guys like Harrison, Holt, Moss, TO, Bruce, Rod Smith, Reed, etc.

You got that right, buddy. I'd be willing to bet some serious money (if I had it) that not a single one of these guys from here on out will make it in on first ballot. There are just too many. If Reed and Carter couldn't, there's no way that any of those following do.

And Bruce... wow he was a beast. My all time favorite non-Viking WR. YAC, YAC, YAC.

Hot + Bruce = Proof that WR's can carry a QB.

Marrdro wrote:

Hot + Bruce = Proof that WR's can carry a QB.

hmm... so Kurt Warner is no good theN?

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Hot + Bruce = Proof that WR's can carry a QB.

hmm... so Kurt Warner is no good theN?

Even though I liked what Warner did with the Rams as well as the Cards, one has to then step back and ask what happened to him when he was on the Giants?

In short, you give a QB cats like Fitz/Bolden or Bruce/Holt, and a QB can look very very very good.

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Hot + Bruce = Proof that WR's can carry a QB.

hmm... so Kurt Warner is no good theN?

Even though I liked what Warner did with the Rams as well as the Cards, one has to then step back and ask what happened to him when he was on the Giants?

In short, you give a QB cats like Fitz/Bolden or Bruce/Holt, and a QB can look very very very good.

like you can hold that against him.

9 games, 2000 yards and 6 TD's and an 86 QB rating, all with a terrible, terrible OL.

He actually didn't do THAT bad considering. over the course of a full season, that would translate to roughly 3600 yards.

Thats what happens when you put an old, immobile guy behind a terrible line.

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Hot + Bruce = Proof that WR's can carry a QB.

hmm... so Kurt Warner is no good theN?

Even though I liked what Warner did with the Rams as well as the Cards, one has to then step back and ask what happened to him when he was on the Giants?

In short, you give a QB cats like Fitz/Bolden or Bruce/Holt, and a QB can look very very very good.

like you can hold that against him.

9 games, 2000 yards and 6 TD's and an 86 QB rating, all with a terrible, terrible OL.

He actually didn't do THAT bad considering. over the course of a full season, that would translate to roughly 3600 yards.

Thats what happens when you put an old, immobile guy behind a terrible line.

Could that rationale be applied to a young inexperience QB behind a terrible OL? :huh:

Banish the thought.

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Hot + Bruce = Proof that WR's can carry a QB.

hmm... so Kurt Warner is no good theN?

Even though I liked what Warner did with the Rams as well as the Cards, one has to then step back and ask what happened to him when he was on the Giants?

In short, you give a QB cats like Fitz/Bolden or Bruce/Holt, and a QB can look very very very good.

like you can hold that against him.

9 games, 2000 yards and 6 TD's and an 86 QB rating, all with a terrible, terrible OL.

He actually didn't do THAT bad considering. over the course of a full season, that would translate to roughly 3600 yards.

Thats what happens when you put an old, immobile guy behind a terrible line.

Could that rationale be applied to a young inexperience QB behind a terrible OL? :huh:

Banish the thought.

if it were an isolated, one time thing? Sure. I have a feeling the young inexperienced QB you refer to had many chances to succeed and didn't.

Warner Has played great more times than not, and was even acceptable behind a terrible OL with Toomer as his primary weapon.

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Hot + Bruce = Proof that WR's can carry a QB.

hmm... so Kurt Warner is no good theN?

Even though I liked what Warner did with the Rams as well as the Cards, one has to then step back and ask what happened to him when he was on the Giants?

In short, you give a QB cats like Fitz/Bolden or Bruce/Holt, and a QB can look very very very good.

like you can hold that against him.

9 games, 2000 yards and 6 TD's and an 86 QB rating, all with a terrible, terrible OL.

He actually didn't do THAT bad considering. over the course of a full season, that would translate to roughly 3600 yards.

Thats what happens when you put an old, immobile guy behind a terrible line.

Could that rationale be applied to a young inexperience QB behind a terrible OL? :huh:

Banish the thought.

if it were an isolated, one time thing? Sure. I have a feeling the young inexperienced QB you refer to had many chances to succeed and didn't.

Warner Has played great more times than not, and was even acceptable behind a terrible OL with Toomer as his primary weapon.

I love the "He had many chances" line. You must think the Vikes were full up round and ready to go when it was gutted then to. LOL.

As to Warner. He dissapeared when he left the Rams and was anything but acceptable.

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

i_bleed_purple wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Hot + Bruce = Proof that WR's can carry a QB.

hmm... so Kurt Warner is no good theN?

Even though I liked what Warner did with the Rams as well as the Cards, one has to then step back and ask what happened to him when he was on the Giants?

In short, you give a QB cats like Fitz/Bolden or Bruce/Holt, and a QB can look very very very good.

like you can hold that against him.

9 games, 2000 yards and 6 TD's and an 86 QB rating, all with a terrible, terrible OL.

He actually didn't do THAT bad considering. over the course of a full season, that would translate to roughly 3600 yards.

Thats what happens when you put an old, immobile guy behind a terrible line.

Could that rationale be applied to a young inexperience QB behind a terrible OL? :huh:

Banish the thought.

if it were an isolated, one time thing? Sure. I have a feeling the young inexperienced QB you refer to had many chances to succeed and didn't.

Warner Has played great more times than not, and was even acceptable behind a terrible OL with Toomer as his primary weapon.

I love the "He had many chances" line. You must think the Vikes were full up round and ready to go when it was gutted then to. LOL.

As to Warner. He dissapeared when he left the Rams and was anything but acceptable.

bullshit. As caine pointed out, every other QB we've signed, all of whom have been terrible have been able to out-perform TJ with the exact same team around them.

But back to your Warner Logic. I guess taht means that Moss is crap right? Sinc ehe 'disappeared' in oakland. Or that Jerry Rice is nothing special, since he 'disappeared' in Seattle.

Do receivers make a QB look better? Absolutely, you'd be stupid to think otherwise, but Warner is not solely a product of the system. The reason he couldn't make New York into contenders is becausee that whole team sucked. You can add a guy like Warner who can give players opportunities, but if they can't take advantage, it kinda limits what they can do.