The St. Louis Rams will win the NFC West

I will do the same as my opponent this round, that is, rebutting his contentions and hopefully having enough characters to add some of my own. I hope that he feels better soon.R1: QuarterbacksBradford v. Jackson: My opponent is under the assumption that quarterbacks must throw the ball extremely well to be successful. However, we have seen that a running quarterback can be quite successful both in college (Tim Tebow, Vince Young, Pat White, Cam Newton) and in the NFL (Michael Vick anyone?). Having this type of quarterback just requires that you focus on a more versatile and mobile offense, rather than one that depends on great pass protection, good WR's, and a great QB. My opponent seems to think that Bradford will be an elite quarterback next year due to his projections. Yet these projections[1] (if he had these stats last year) would have placed him only 9th in passing yards, 15th in touchdowns,and tied for 12th in interceptions [2]. None of these stats show a bad QB, they show one that is growing into his position. My point is that while Bradford may one day be an elite QB (which my opponent relies on for his argument), that is not next year.As I've already shown, a successful running team does not need a phenomenal feature back. Out of the top 10 rushing teams of last year, 6 of them had some form of RBC and one (the Eagles) saw a split in running between Vick and McCoy [3]. So you tell me, is feature back really necessary for at top of the line running game?Whether or not the system McDaniels employs is similar to Martz's on the 99' Rams is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is this is not the '99 Rams, this is the '11 Rams. Bradford is no Kurt Warner (Warner got 18 more TDs than Bradford is expected to get)[4] and the Rams WR's are no longer Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt (two of the most dominant WR's in the league at the time).Bradford v Kolb: I find my opponent's point that a difference of touchdowns per game of .3 is "none" a bit humorous because the difference between Smith (who my opponent holds with contempt) and Bradford is only .2. Kolb may have suffered a concussion last year in the first game, but as cited previously, he made a full recovery. He came back and played and managed to stay healthy for the rest of the season. I would also like to take this moment to point out that even though the Cardinals had the 25th ranked O-line last season, guess who had the 26th ranked O-line? The St. Louis Rams[5]. My opponent is confident that his pocket passing QB will dominate even though similar passers (Brady and Peyton Manning) had the 5th and 12th ranked lines.Bradford v Smith: Although Smith was less productive, my opponent has already pointed out that he finds this difference meaningless (see above). While I will not contend that the difference is meaningless, I do not think that the difference is significant enough to declare that the Rams have the best QB outright.R2: RunningbacksJackson v GoreI cannot deny that a more bruising running style results in a shorter "shelf-life" for runningbacks. However, rushing attempts (the amount of workload) are the most telling factor for how long a runningback will last. While Gore only has 1371 attempts, Jackson has a whopping 1874 attempts[6][7]. Despite their equality in age, that's effectively two more seasons worth of running that Jackson has over Gore. Although Dahl may provide some much needed support, he's not going to bring one of the worst O-line's in the league completely around.Jackson v the Seattle three: I did not and it would be complete folly to compare Jackson to any one of the Seattle backs. However, that is the beauty of an RBC, it does not require one feature back. Every RB has his own role and complements the weaknesses of the others. There is a reason the majority of NFL teams are moving to a running system based on the RBC [8].Jackson v Hightower & Wells: My opponent seems completely set on the idea that a team needs a feature back to be successful. While they may be more fun and much more useful to fantasy owners, the fact of the matter is that RBC are a better system for a team to use. What you have to look at is how the RBC works as a group, not as individual runners. Looking at this way, my opponent has even conceded that they provide better numbers than the talented (but solo) Steven Jackson.R3: Rams ReceiversI would like to point out that Sims-Walker was dropped from his last team (Jacksonville Jaguars) after his dismal production. Sims-Walker has never provided a 1000 yd season and remains a mid-level journeyman receiver.I understand my opponent has had difficulties with the character space, so I will allow him another round to respond to my points about the receivers on the other NFC West teams.C1: DefenseRams: The Rams ranked an unexceptional (but not dreadful) 19th in total defense, 19th in passing defense, and 16th in rushing defense[9]. I point this out for two reasons: to show that the Rams are not a team that can rely on a stud defense to lead them to victory like the Ravens, Steelers, Jets, etc..., and to set up my argument below.49ers: San Francisco ranked a bit worse at 13th in total defense, 23th in passing defense, and 6th in rushing defense. While this defense was worse than the Rams in passing, the addition of Jim Harbaugh will boost this defensive unit immensely. Why is that? Well, look at Harbaugh's brother, John Harbaugh, and the stalwart defense he's led in Baltimore. We can only help but expect more of the same from this family of defensive-orientated coaches. Secondly, this group dominated runningbacks last season (so good luck to Steven Jackson).The other two teams ranked lower in overall defense but I believe that their offensive superiority (especially in the case of the Cardinals) will more than make up for their defensive deficiencies. ConclusionBelow I will state why I believe each team is better than or at least has a good probability at being better than the St. Louis Rams.Seattle Seahawks: I will concede that the Seahawks defense is inferior to that of the Rams, but not necessarily the offense. The addition of Sidney Rice to the already existing throwing weapons of John Carlson and Mike Williams will lead to a much improved passing game in Seattle this year. Lynch also finally got the new offensive system down and next year this could be a very scary RBC to face. Lastly, I would like to remind the voters that the Rams had a chance to win the title last year but lost to the Seahawks in the final game of the regular season. The Seahawks then went on to prove how good of a team they could be by defeating the then Super Bowl Champion New Orleans Saints.San Francisco 49ers: As shown above, the 49ers defense is both superior to that of the Rams' and in line for even more improvement. In other aspects the 49ers are close to equal with the Rams (with QB's and RB's having similar production). However, I would like to bring up again the fact that Jackson is wearing down and will be seeing a drop in his production this season.Arizona Cardinals: This team to me is the best team in the NFC West. In this division, they have the best QB (looking at all available stats), the best RBC, the best WR (Ftizgerald), and a team that knows how to win (only been 3 years since their last Super Bowl. Out of characters now. I wish my opponent luck and look forward to his next argument.[1] http://rotochamp.com...[2] http://espn.go.com...[3] http://espn.go.com...[4] http://www.nfl.com...[5] http://www.profootballfocus.com...[6] http://www.nfl.com...[7]http://www.nfl.com...[8] http://www.thehuddle.com...[9] http://espn.go.com...