- This topic has 15 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
I don’t see this team as “bad.” I see it as astonishingly unlucky. For example, not every team has had a 2011 to cope with–and Football Outsiders said the 2011 offense was the single-most injured offense since 2002 (which is as far as they went back).
So not many teams have a 2011.
This one has had two, within 4 years.
That’s just freaking weird heavy bad, bad luck.
The effect is the same as “being bad.” But still.
It’s… the curse.
–
zn wrote:
I don’t see this team as “bad.” I see it as astonishingly unlucky. For example, not every team has had a 2011 to cope with–and Football Outsiders said the 2011 offense was the single-most injured offense since 2002 (which is as far as they went back).So not many teams have a 2011.
This one has had two, within 4 years.
That’s just freaking weird heavy bad, bad luck.
The effect is the same as “being bad.” But still.
It’s… the curse.
Okay, sure. That’s true. But they kinda sucked before the OL got all Dresdened yesterday.
They had an OL that was not together because it didn’t play together in camp because they were recovering. They were starting their 3rd qb. So injuries were already taking their toll, sometimes in indirect ways (like a buncha recovering linemen not playing together as a unit).
It is true that the defense kept making monumental mistakes of a kind only young players in a new system make.
But this team was not “bad” at the level of talent or coaching. That’s not what I saw, anyway. I saw the effects of cohesion issues and injuries on offense, and I saw the “McDaniel effect” of young players in a new system on defense.
They also dominated for stretches on both O and D.
Teams that meet that overall description improve.
Unless you injure them up beyond recognition.
Same as 2011. They didn’t adapt quickly to the McD system, and by the time they were starting to, the St. Louis Reaper came and left injury devastation behind him.
I don’t see this team as “bad.” I see it as astonishingly unlucky. For example, not every team has had a 2011 to cope with–and Football Outsiders said the 2011 offense was the single-most injured offense since 2002 (which is as far as they went back).
So not many teams have a 2011.
This one has had two, within 4 years.
That’s just freaking weird heavy bad, bad luck.
The effect is the same as “being bad.” But still.
It’s… the curse.
–
With the injury argument I will give you the thumping we will take for the rest of the season. But not games 1-6. Bradford and Long were the only ones missing. We got good QB play from Davis so Bradford’s injury was covered. Unless you think losing Chris Long made them lose all those games, I don’t think we can use the injury bug to explain the first 4 losses
I feel your pain, Zooey. I need to experience a football season in which the team I support is relevant again before I die, and with each year that passes in which that is not the case just makes the frustration that much more intense. And I do consider this a “bad” team. An awful team, in fact. Not that there isn’t a fair amount of individual talent on the roster, but they have no clue how to bring those talents together for the team’s benefit. And their coaches don’t seem to be able to bring them together. And I am losing my inclination to spend much time on them. If it doesn’t mean enough to them to learn to play the game on a professional level, why should mean that much to me? I can find other games to watch involving teams that get it. I saw a local meteorologist give his weather forecast last night from a maze cut through a cornfield. He wandered around cluelessly for about an hour and a half before someone came in and got him out. Naturally, the Rams came to mind. I just wonder who’s going to come into the maze and bring them out. “Career suicide” comes to mind. I don’t know. They’ve worn me out. I can’t stand to look at them.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
