Rams Head Coach Jeff Fisher –– 12/16/15

(On if he’s ready for the game)
“We are ready. They had a great day today. Today’s Friday for us in our world and then we have a walk-thru this evening, which becomes Saturday and then we go tomorrow. So yeah, we had a good day. Legs are back and it looked like everybody is doing well.”

(On how CB Janoris Jenkins came out of the concussion protocol)
“He’s been cleared and he was full practice today and he’s probable.”

(On if Jenkins playing will help)
“That’ll help, yeah.”

(On if RB Todd Gurley and T Rob Havenstein were full practice today)
“Yes. Everybody was full and probable. They’re both probable. So we healed up. We’ve got a big challenge. The thing is, from a defensive standpoint, it’s stopping their run. They’re really well-coached up front and they can run the football. The back is a really good back. The young back out of the backfield has got a bunch of catches and they create match-ups for you. Their tight ends are blocking real well. They do a lot of different personnel groupings and it’s a well-coached offense. We’ve got to keep (Tampa Bay QB) Jameis (Winston) in the pocket.”

(On if he was happier with his run defense last week)
“No. We were a little better, but still, we gave up some plays. It’s going to happen. People are going to run the football at times against you. You’ve got to tackle. You’ve got to be gap sound in your fits. This team can run the football. You go back and look at some games, they ran it against some decent defenses.”

(On if he’s heard any news on WR Stedman Bailey)
“He’s progressing. As I mentioned, he’s out of intensive care. He’s in-patient. It appears that within the next week or so, he’ll be released from the hospital, so it’s good news.”

(On if Bailey will make an appearance at Rams Park)
“Don’t know. Eventually he will. But, don’t know whether he’s been cleared to travel right now.”

Rams Defensive Coordinator Gregg Williams – 12/16/15

(On if the team is practicing at the Edward Jones Dome tonight)
“We’ll go through a walk-thru tonight, which is kind of cool. (Head Coach) Jeff’s (Fisher) been doing that for a long time on our Thursday night schedule, so we’ll go down there tonight and simulate some things tonight. We’ll go through our final things. What we do is we cram all of our practices into short week. Tonight’s like our Saturday, like on a true week. This morning was a lot like our Friday practice, which is good. We’ve got all of our reps. I think our guys have done a very good job of adjusting to the schedule. A lot of credit goes to (Director/Sports Medicine & Performance) Reggie (Scott) and (Head Strength & Conditioning Coach) Rock (Gullickson) and their staffs on getting those guys ready to go. From the assistants and everybody on is that they have to handle the information quick. Guys process it quick. We’ve had some good work this week, so I’ll be anxious to see them play tomorrow night.”

(On what he sees from Buccaneers QB Jameis Winston on film)
“Very, very impressed. I think (Buccaneers Offensive Coordinator) Dirk Koetter…I have a lot of respect for him. Dirk and I coached together many years ago. I think he’s done a fantastic job with the kid. You can see why he was the first pick and he and (Titans QB) Marcus (Mariota) both deserved to be up there in the draft. They have played very well. Jameis is really improved as the year’s gone on. He’s not afraid to throw it into tight coverage. You have to be able to do that to play quarterback at our level. You can’t be afraid of small windows of opportunity – he’s not. He’s done a very good job and you can tell from a leadership standpoint, there are those natural leaders and there are those guys that kind of evolve into leadership. You can see he’s a natural leader. You can see those guys respond to him. So, I’m anxious to see him in person. On film, he looks very, very good.”

(On Buccaneers WR Mike Evans)
“Very big. We went against him last year, had a chance to see some of him last year. Our guys in the match-up, there’s still a few guys there from our early game last year on the match-ups. I talk to our guys all the time about making a book and basically, you’re always taking notes. You’re taking notes on guys in practice you’ll practice against. You’re taking notes on guys in the preseason, during the regular season because in our league, you could end up anywhere in free agency, you bounce around. So hopefully, they took some notes from last year, and understand some of the techniques and some of the presence of physical ability on those guys. Mike does a very good job. He’s got a big catch radius. He runs very well for a big guy, too. We went against some this year, some big guys anyway. Last week, we had some big guys. So hopefully, we can transition into this plan, too.”

(On Buccaneers RB Doug Martin averaging almost 100 yards a game)
“I know our guys are sick and tired of me this week of pounding that point in the meeting, but he has had, on film, the most explosive runs that I’ve seen anybody all year long we’ve played. He has really done a great job in the explosive runs. They’ve done a very good job in their run-blocking scheme. (Buccaneers Offensive Line Coach) George Warhop, I’ve known him for a long time, too, their line coach does a really good job. I see his teachings and his fundamental skill sets of what he asks his guys to do is very recognizable to me. Hopefully, it will be recognizable to our guys. But, I think Doug has played very well. He’s healthy this year. He’s played healthy this year and he’s been really explosive. Once he gets out there in the open field, it’s a tough time getting him down.”

(On if Winston is harder to bring down than the average quarterback)
“He’s very strong. He’s a big guy, but there’s a lot of the guys in this league. One of the most dominant guys in the pocket is Ben, whenever you play (Steelers QB Ben) Roethlisberger, but we’ve even kind of said a few things about that similarity in the pocket. He doesn’t go down easy. He’s very strong in the pocket. He’s got decent speed, not great speed, but you have a hard time bringing him down because of his size.”

(On the difference in Tampa Bay’s offensive line this year compared to last year establishing their run game)
“I think they’ve played it with each other a little bit longer. I know last year (Buccaneers G) Logan (Mankins) had just gotten there at the end of the regular season. You can see his leadership also there. They’ve moved some pieces around and it’s just one more time around with the coaching staff there. Don’t discount Dirk Koetter’s ability to get his point across. I really respect him a lot. In coaching, in teaching, in sales, in leadership – whatever it is, you’ve got to get people to listen to you. Dirk has that skill set. Dirk has an ability to get anybody, whether you’re a future Hall of Famer or whether you’re a guy that just barely made the team, he can get you listen to him. He’s done a very good job, in a short amount of time, of getting them all on the same page.”

(On where he coached with Koetter)
“I was at Jacksonville. Yeah, I left the Redskins and then went down there with him and with (Jack) Del Rio and those guys. He did a really good job down there. Mike Tice was there, too, Andy Heck and all those guys. It was a pretty good staff.”

(On when Koetter was at Missouri)
“He was there. I ran into him obviously being from the state and everything, I ran into him, too back in those days, too. I didn’t know him as well until I worked with him.”

(On if he’s trying to emphasize the things he’s seen Winston not do well or is he trying to give him new looks)
“You’d hope… I think he is a very, very study conscious young man. I think the word on the street, we tease about that a little cliché, that he is a study-a-holic. But, you would hope that a young guy hasn’t seen some of the pictures that we can paint and disguise. But, he’s done very well. Dirk does a good job on causing defenses to all of a sudden show their hand on how you pull the defense out of showing your hand. Now, it becomes more of a mono e mono, one on one match-up, can you win your match-up? But, we hope that we can present some pictures to him. We’re based that way, anyway. It’s been kind of…my portfolio is to do that quite a bit. When you’re at this time of the season, you’ve got a lot of snaps on film. There’s no doubt in my mind, he’s studied them all.”

Rams RB Todd Gurley – 12/16/15

(On how he got to know Buccaneers quarterback Jameis Winston)
“We played in a high school All-American game back in high school, so we’ve been cool ever since then.”

(On if they’ve kept in contact over the years)
“Yeah, that’s my boy.”

(On if he’s been exchanging messages with him this week)
“Just texting me. He texted me earlier and told me good game and just asking, ‘How you doing? How you feeling?’ We talk once a week, so we always talk.”

(On how meaningful it will be to get 1,000 rushing yards)
“It’ll be cool. Shout out to my linemen and the whole team for helping me get there. I definitely didn’t do everything on my own.”

(On if his lighter practice schedule this week has helped him get ready for the game)
“This is my first Thursday night game, so there’s definitely a big difference from playing Sunday to Sunday than going Sunday to Thursday. Coach has looked out for me earlier in this week. Just got to be ready to go tomorrow.”

(On what he thinks about the Rookie of the Year race)
“I’m not worried about all of that. Just trying to finish the season off strong.”

(On if it normally takes a few days to get the body back after having 20-25 carries)
“Oh yeah, it definitely takes until about Tuesday or Wednesday to start feeling back right again.”

(On what he sees from the Tampa Bay defense)
“Very physical front. They’ve got the Tampa 2. They’ve got some great players, great linebackers. Definitely got great speed. Just a good awareness to the ball. (DT Gerald) McCoy down there in the tackle position. He’s just a game wrecker. You definitely have got to be aware of him.”

(On if he was excited that coaches wanted to run the ball in the second half of the Detroit game)
“You definitely get excited. I feel like my biggest thing last game was that I had those two plays at the end of the half that I felt like could have went for big yards. I missed the trap and the screen play, so I was definitely eager to get back out there in the second half.”

(On how much he relishes in facing another elite back even though they don’t face off head-to-head)
“It’s always, like you said I’m not playing against him, but when you see a guy over there doing his thing, it definitely motivates you to want to get on the field and put up some yards. So, that’ll definitely be good. He’s a great running back.”

(On if he likes the color rush uniforms)
“Yeah, they’re pretty cool. Something different. It’s pretty cool.”

from BEST PLAYERS AT EVERY POSITION FROM WEEK 14

Todd Gurley and Cam Newton highlight Khaled Elsayed’s list of the top performers at every position in Week 14.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/12/14/pro-best-players-at-every-position-from-week-14/

Running Back: Todd Gurley, Rams (+2.6)

This is more like it from Gurley, who found his spark this week and promptly used just 31 snaps and 16 rushes to put a world of pain on the Lions. When he’s good, he’s very good.

Defensive interior – Ends: Aaron Donald, Rams (+6.9), and Kawann Short, Panthers (+6.7)

Another appearance for Donald, who had three sacks, three further hits, and another hurry, as he continues to make his case for Defensive Player of the Year. Short might not be at that level (yet), but with two sacks and two forced fumbles, he’s already something of a playmaker.

Cornerbacks: Trumaine Johnson, Rams (+5.2) and Ronald Darby, Bills (+4.1)

We were starting to worry if Darby had hit a rookie wall, but he was back to his best as he allowed just three-of-seven balls into his coverage to be completed, breaking up two for good measure. Johnson had one of the plays of the day with his patient pick-six, continuing his much improved season.

The Best Offensive Minds

http://mmqb.si.com/2014/12/02/nfl-mike-martz-adam-gase-mike-mccoy-mike-mccarthy-best-offensive-minds

Mike Martz, architect of The Greatest Show on Turf, breaks down the game-planning and play-calling of the NFL’s top three offensive coaches. Here’s what you should know about Mike McCoy, Adam Gase and Mike McCarthy
by Robert Klemko

SAN DIEGO — Football always seemed like war to Mike Martz. Not the carnage and loss—those don’t compare—but the strategy. Calling shots with the big-picture view of a general, he loved the way offensive football felt like moving 18th-century battalions into the right position to stun the opposition. Attack and counterattack.

Fitting then, that his favorite book isn’t one of the Lombardi biographies or the spiritual tome My Utmost for His Highest, sitting within arm’s reach on the auburn desk inside the basement office of his San Diego home. It’s 1776, David McCullough’s telling of the bloody birth of the United States. Of particular interest to Martz are the military exploits of the Revolutionary War’s most famous general.

“I kind of thought I knew George Washington and his career,” he says. “But the author wrote this book so personally. Washington never buckled, and if he did, nobody ever knew about it.

“The thing I really admire is he was always a step ahead. Even though it might have hurt him, the emotion of losing New York, you have to find a way to get back in the fight. That’s a lot like football: Take the emotion out of it and fix the problem.”

Three years removed from his last coaching gig as the Bears’ offensive coordinator, Martz, 63, spends most of his days in his three-story home, which sits on a hill in a cul-de-sac neighborhood overlooking the coast. His office is just big enough for a desk and a few dozen mementos that tell the story of a football life.

[​IMG]
Mike Martz, best known for overseeing The Greatest Show on Turf, in the basement office of his San Diego home, where he watched game tape with The MMQB. (Robert Klemko)

There’s a framed photo of his grandfather’s 1902 Yankton High football team, which won South Dakota’s state championship. (Martz keeps a vacation home in South Dakota, where he was born, and has made a hobby of photographing its cascading mountains and snowscapes.) There’s a game ball from a 2002 win over the Raiders, the Rams’ first victory after losing Kurt Warner and five straight games to start the season.

There’s a signed bat from Stan Musial, the baseball Hall of Famer who lunched with Martz when Martz was the head coach in St. Louis. Authentic NFL helmets, given to him an equipment manager friend in 2000, line the ceiling. There’s a sun-bleached Super Bowl XXXIV replica trophy from 1999, Martz’s first season as the Rams’ coordinator.

After 38 years of coaching, Martz’s legacy boils down to the Greatest Show on Turf, the record-setting offense he engineered with coach Dick Vermeil and quarterback Kurt Warner in St. Louis. They were innovators who introduced the new concepts they dreamed up on napkins and notepads, picking apart defenses with the likes of Marshall Faulk, Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt.

I’m meeting with him in his basement, seeking the answer to a broad-sweeping question: Who are the NFL’s new offensive pioneers?

“There was a time in the league when people were really creative, but that’s gone,” says Martz, picking through a pile of game-film DVDs that coaching friends and former protégés have mailed him. “There are a few guys who really know what they’re doing and are trying new things—or just putting a twist on old things.”

Martz entered the NFL in the early 1990s, as Buddy Ryan’s zone blitz or “zone dog” concepts were giving offenses fits. Watch any VHS tape of an NFL game from that decade and you’ll see two receivers releasing on third down, sometimes with tight ends and running backs held in to block—an unthinkable and downright boring tactic by today’s standards.

“At the time, defense dominated football,” Martz says. “Offense didn’t have an answer for zone dog, so they just brought in more guys to block. It was frustrating. Defense dictated the game. We tried to flop that.”

Martz’s answer was to vary personnel groups, creating mismatches by running the same play out of five different formations. He and his offensive contemporaries began emphasizing pre-snap motion to identify coverages and defensive plans. Soon enough, offenses began dictating the game. The 2000 Rams set an NFL record with 7,335 yards from scrimmage, surpassing the 1984 Dolphins’ mark by nearly 300 yards. (The Rams’ mark has since been surpassed by the 2011 Saints and the 2013 Broncos.)

Using the numbers system for offensive play-calling handed down by Don Coryell, which is still in vogue with a handful of coaches, Martz came into his own as a game-planner and a play-caller just as the Rams accidentally discovered Warner, a former Arena league quarterback who turned out to be one of the greatest passers in a generation.

Twelve years and two Super Bowl appearances later, Martz resigned from his coordinator job in Chicago after the 2011 season, citing philosophical differences. Bears quarterback Jay Cutler later suggested the game had passed him by. Martz, who declined to speak about Cutler, says the opposite. Part of him wants another shot. A larger part of him is happy just watching the occasional game tape.

As he loads up the first DVD, Martz takes one look at the Broncos’ offense and the Colts’ defense and sighs.

“You know what’s funny?” he says. “I just realized I don’t know half these guys’ names anymore.”

What he recognizes these days is great coaching.

The three names Martz wants you to know—Adam Gase, the Bronco’s offensive coordinator; Mike McCoy, the Chargers’ head coach; and Mike McCarthy, the Packers head coach—are the types of game-planners and play-callers who make him long for the action on Sunday afternoons.

Adam Gase — Matchup Nightmares

Martz uses a clicker to go through Denver’s season-opening win over the Colts. We watch every play two or three times, an old habit for the coach. On Mondays after games he might have watched the tape four times—by himself, with the coaches, with the quarterback, and, finally with the offense.

We’re on a hunt for the coaching identity of Adam Gase, the Broncos’ 36-year-old coordinator. He began as a scouting assistant in Detroit in 2003 under Steve Marriucci and worked his way up to quarterbacks coach by 2007, the last of Martz’s two years as offensive coordinator with the Lions. After two seasons in Denver, Gase is arguably No. 1 on the unofficial list of head coaching candidates for 2015.

Martz hones in on one particular run. With 9:28 left in the first quarter, Montee Ball runs off tackle for four yards. No big deal, right? Watch again. There’s motion on the bottom of the screen. Gase knows from his film study that it’s de facto policy for the Colts to drop the strongside safety into the box when the offense is in a bunch formation, and to retreat the weakside safety. So he motions a receiver into bunch, and Manning immediately calls for the snap.

[​IMG]

[​IMG]

Ball takes the handoff with both safeties out of their ideal positions; one is even retreating away from the play. If Ball had made it beyond the first level, he had nothing but open field.

“This is big,” Martz says. “Playing defense is about rules. If you understand their rules, you can put them in bad positions.”

The Broncos have had problems running the ball, ranking 27th in the NFL in yards per game. Some of that falls on Manning as a play-caller. But Martz also sees it as a symptom of inexperience. Gase only sprinkles in the occasional zone-blocking run. “If you want to run zone-running plays, you have to do it over and over again. You have to have reps,” Martz says. “Twenty years ago it was difficult to evaluate quarterbacks because they might have thrown 120 times a year. Now it’s 450. You used to be able to evaluate running backs. Now that’s switched.”

Where Gase thrives, though, is in the passing game.

Second quarter, 6:50 remaining. Martz recognizes an old standby: 288 special, so named by Coryell. Two receivers run identical posts on the left side of the field, hence ‘88’.

[​IMG]

On their way to winning Super Bowl XXXIV, Martz ran this exact play on the Rams’ first snap of their divisional-round victory over the Vikings in January 2000. Isaac Bruce took the inside post route 78 yards for a touchdown. On the Fox broadcast, John Madden exclaimed, “He did it!” So confident was Dick Vermeil that he told the broadcast crew they would run 288 on the first play. In the aftermath, Madden drew it up as only he can.

[​IMG]

The Rams got the play from Norv Turner, who at the time “used to run the heck out of it,” Martz says. But Gase runs his own tweaked version of 288, which demonstrates his ability to create mismatches. On this play against Indianapolis, Gase positions his best pass-catching tight end, Julius Thomas, in a three-point stance, and a blocking tight end as the wing. Thomas will cross the field and the face of the defense.

[​IMG]

Consider these contingencies:

A) If the Colts are in man defense, Gase and Manning know the linebacker will cover the tight end on the inside while the better-qualified safety will check the wing, because most offenses position the more agile player as the wing. Julius Thomas would then be covered by linebacker D’Qwell Jackson. No-brainer.

B) If the Colts are in a Cover 2, Manning will try to look off one of the safeties and throw the open post.

C) If it’s Cover 3, Thomas might still be open underneath, and you can always check down to the running back.

The Colts were in man coverage, and Thomas beat Jackson (of course) for a 35-yard touchdown.

[​IMG]

“As a coach,” Martz says, “you have to have an answer for the quarterback so he knows where he’s supposed to go with the ball against every coverage. If Thomas was the wing, the safety would cover him. But by sticking him inside, now that linebacker has him. The safety wants to cover, and it’s logical for the safety to cover him, but he’s told not to.

“That, by design, is outstanding. It’d be easy to put him on the wing, but Adam knows the defense’s rules. All the little details work out really well. Very few people do this.

“They’ve got good players, and he knows what to do with them. He puts guys in position to have success. It would be easy to do the same stuff over and over, but each week he’s going to create.”

Mike McCoy — Deciphering Defenses

My trip to San Diego included a conversation with Mike McCoy on the progress of Philip Rivers. It was McCoy who had impressed upon Rivers in 2013 the value of what some call the dink-and-dunk: As a quarterback, read almost everything in the passing game from low to high, rather than from high to low. Asked how many quarterbacks would be better in that sort of offense, McCoy said, “All 32 of them.”

Martz’s offenses were never so patient, but in the Chargers head coach he sees football’s best offensive mind, saying, “I think right now he might be the best head coach in the league.”

Martz pulls up San Diego’s signature win of the season, a dethroning of sorts of the Seahawks in Week 2.

“Here’s how they won this game, and it wasn’t a fluke,” Martz says. “Real low risk, didn’t ask Rivers to hold the ball long or throw it down the field. Just run downhill on these guys. A team like Seattle that does a lot of stuff on defense, they can stunt themselves right out of the running game.”

During their opening drive, which resulted in a field goal, the Chargers lined up in a left-heavy formation, got set, and then abruptly shifted to the right, sending Seattle’s defense into disarray. The result: a four-yard gain off tackle.

Here’s what the Seahawks’ defense looked like just before the ball was snapped:

[​IMG]

“Whether it’s a good play or a bad play, he’s got them on their heels,” Martz says. “To get three yards on these guys is tough in the running game. No. 93 doesn’t even have his hand on the ground and he’s getting ear-holed at the snap.

“Anytime you can get a defense just a half a step off, you’ve got a leg up on them.”

A testament to Seattle’s defense, the Chargers had less than 70 rushing yards in their 30-21 win. Most of the offensive production rested on Rivers and the passing game. At the beginning of the next drive, the Chargers’ formation caused Seattle’s linebackers to betray a careful disguise.

[​IMG]

Antonio Gates motioned inside from the right, and nobody on defense moved a muscle. That’s by design: Carroll and Quinn want the passer to think he’s playing against a zone, but it’s really a man defense with rules that say the strongside linebacker covers the slot receiver and the safety covers the second receiver from the sideline.

“Seattle’s whole thing is disguising the coverage and beating you at the line of scrimmage before you recuperate,” Martz says. “That’s how they won the Super Bowl.”

The hope is that a five-man rush can get there before Rivers figures it out.

But the Chargers’ pre-snap alignment gives Rivers a glimpse of Seattle’s scheme. Because the running back is to the right of the quarterback on the three-receiver side, linebacker Malcolm Smith lines up over the center. Though he doesn’t want to betray Seattle’s ruse, Smith also doesn’t want to get beaten on a route to the strongside flat. “Rivers recognizes this,” Martz says, “and you don’t figure that out without being prepared and having a very specific understanding of how the defense will react to your sets.”

Rivers knows it’s man coverage, and he also knows linebacker Bobby Wagner is responsible for Antonio Gates, who catches the ball 15 yards downfield.

“Know the man coverage beater on every play,” Martz says. “The first thing he’s looking at is the linebackers. If they’re out of position, he’s not even looking downfield. He’s checking down. That’s too easy.”

Mike McCarthy — Understanding Tendencies

Great football tickles Mike Martz. Outstanding audibles make him squeal. Well-drawn-up plays send him into man-crush mode.

“You want to talk about a great coach?” he asks. “Check out Mike McCarthy.”

His level of preparation is what stands out the most. We watch only 30 seconds of Green Bay’s Week 5 victory over Minnesota before identifying something special.

[​IMG]

On first-and-10 near midfield, Rodgers recognizes a defensive alignment and checks to a run off the left guard. Eddie Lacy takes the handoff for 29 yards, setting up a Packers touchdown.

“This is a run check. See the two tackles, outside shade on the guards? You never have that unless it’s third-and-long. It’s probably going to be a double plug up the middle by the backers. So you check to this run, and if he gets through there, there’s no scraping linebacker. You’ve got to look at a lot of tape and really understand the defense to know that’s going to happen.”

The ensuing touchdown was an eight-yard flip to Randall Cobb, who has 922 receiving yards and 10 touchdowns through 12 games. Says Martz, “I tried to get Chicago to draft him, but they said, ‘No. Too little, not really a receiver.’ ”

We skip ahead to Rodgers’ 66-yard touchdown bomb to Jordy Nelson, who beats safety Harrison Smith with a double move to the post. The play appears to be a masterly combination of ability, planning and execution. Martz explains the concept of boundary coverage. When the offense is on a particular hash mark, the wider side of the field is known as ‘field.’ Some coordinators will ask one safety to cover the short half, and two other players to split the larger ‘field’ in half.

[​IMG]

“This cracks me up. McCarthy knows that when he’s in a certain personnel, [Vikings head coach Mike] Zimmer will leave the safety on the short side of the field responsible for half the field with the safety and the other cornerback responsible for the other half. His stat guy is telling him that.

[​IMG]

“He runs play-action to give Jordy Nelson time to execute the double-move,” Martz says. “The receiver on the bottom runs a dig, because McCarthy knows the safety will bite on it. That leaves Jordy Nelson and No. 22 [Smith] all alone back there. Any safety back there might not be able to cover that.

“This is what it’s all about. When you know the defensive rules and you don’t take advantage of them, you ought to be fired.”

* * *

[​IMG]

Retired NFL players talk about struggling to find what comes next. After his last coaching gig, Martz got an immediate answer: television. He worked as an analyst for Fox for a year but found the work impersonal and the workplace fractured by politics.

The idea of getting back into coaching is enticing, and he has no shortage of friends still in the business. Of the 22 players who started during his senior year at Fresno State, 17 went into coaching. (Martz was a tight end.) There are consulting offers to be had, similar to Al Saunders’ role in Oakland. But being the experienced voice that chimes in with advice doesn’t appeal to Martz. Eventually, he’d want to run the show.

“I think about going back all the time,” he says. “But you can’t just kind of go back. You’ve got to go back and do it right.”

For him, that would mean going to a team that values innovation around a traditional dropback quarterback.

“Personnel guys fall in love with a guy who can make plays with his legs,” Martz says of quarterbacks such as Robert Griffin III and Michael Vick. “You tell a personnel guy, ‘OK, your job depends on whether he can win games for us, and if you’re telling me he’s going to win us games by running the football, you’re nuts.’ Then they start having second thoughts.

“Your quarterback has to be a terrific passer first. See the field, make good decisions, and then throw it straight. That’s where RG3 fails. He wants to hold onto the ball when he should let it loose. You can’t cloud up the fact that this game is still played by passers.”

It’s something that Gase, McCoy and McCarthy know better than anyone else.

RamView, November 29, 2015
Game #11: Bengals 31, Rams 7

It’s Thanksgiving time in Cincinnati, and somewhere Jeff Fisher is saying, as God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. In this week’s spiritless, feckless, hapless, worthless blowout loss to the Bengals, his team soared like turkeys and looked every bit like a team just playing out the string. Pass the gravy.

Position by position:
* QB: Nick Foles’ (30-46-228, 3 INT, PR 49.9) toughness this season has been admirable, and he made a couple of good plays this week, but those were tiny flowers poking out of the massive heap of, um, compost that is the Ram offense and Nick’s game. After the offense started the game with an ugly 3-and-out, Foles threw ugly passes behind Jared Cook and Kenny Britt before hitting Cook over the middle for 16. He’d keep the drive alive on 3rd-and-2 by scrambling and backing over A.J. Hawk, but, classic Fisherball, classic Foles, settled for a 3-yard pass to Brian Quick on a 3rd-and-8. More classic Fisherball, the Rams got the ball back across midfield, gained one yard, punted. Down 17-7 before halftime, Foles appeared to rally. Always under pressure from the right side, he hung tough to hit Britt for 18 and beat a 3rd-and-7 blitz to hit Britt for 15 more down to the Bengal 22. The Rams should at least close the gap, right? No, Foles forces a throw for Cook inside the 5 but George Iloka breaks it up and tips the ball to Reggie Nelson for a Bengal INT. That play pretty much turned the tide. The Rams couldn’t get the running game or quick screen game going. The D gave up a quick TD to get the offense pressing even more, and Foles pressed his way into a back-breaking pick-six. Flushed out of the pocket near his goal line, he rolled left, then tried a goofy, cross-body, cross-field throw he thought Bradley Marquez would come back to, but Leon Hall came back to it instead to put the Bengals ahead 31-7. The Rams got across midfield to end the 3rd, but Foles led off the 4th with what I wish was his last throw as a Ram. Britt was wide open down the sideline had Foles’ throw been decent, but, hurried by the Bengal pass rush, Nick made a typical Foles deep throw, an awful, back-footed lob that future Hall-of-Famer Iloka fair caught for Cincy’s third INT. Everything about Foles – technique, decision-making – falls completely apart under pressure. Sean Mannion (6-7-31) got to close out this preseason-quality effort like he closed out games in August, running the 2:00 offense. Unfortunately, his one throw that stood out was the incompletion, an out route that didn’t make it to the sideline on the bounce. Foles wasn’t helped at all by his overmatched row of turnstiles posing as an offensive line, nor by his drumsticks-for-hands receivers. You’ll never see Foles yelling at his teammates or throwing them under the bus in the press, but maybe he needs to. He’s bad and they’re making him look awful.

* RB: Tavon Austin (4-63 rush, 6-33 recv) was the only spark the Ram offense had, and that was mainly on one play. In the 2nd, Todd Gurley took a snap in Wildcat formation and handed off to Austin, who got a solid edge block from Cook (!), zipped around an overpursuing DE and launched into hyperspeed. Britt got him 25 yards’ worth of interference to top off a 60-yard run. That set Austin up for a 5-yard jet sweep TD two plays later behind more solid blocking from Cook (!!). That’ll be the last time “solid blocking” is discussed here, though. It’s remarkable that Gurley (9-19) even gained as much as 19 yards, because he was met in the backfield almost every carry. No one blocked Carlos Dunlap on either of Gurley’s first two runs. The second was a 3-yard loss on 3rd-and-1 because no one blocked Iloka, either. His next carry, two Bengals pinned him behind the LOS but he surged past them and turned a 3-yard loss into a 4-yard gain. No matter, Geno Atkins engulfed him the next play for a 3-yard loss (and an airplane spin). Had Gurley not broken the tackles he did, he would have totaled about 5 yards. He had nowhere to go inside or outside. Fox’s announcers commented that even Earl Campbell wouldn’t have gotten far this week behind the Rams’ blocking. For all he’s been for the Rams this season, young Gurley isn’t that.

* Receivers: None of the Rams’ big receivers play big; Nick Foles, among others, could use one who does. Before halftime, a really good TE with the inside track to a goal line throw would have gone up and got it, won the jump ball. Jared Cook (4-58), though, gets beaten from behind by Iloka, who created an INT. The Ram offense discovered the quick slant this week, which led to a wildly-productive game for Kenny Britt (6-63). Dre Kirkpatrick got credit for a pass breakup, but the incomplete pass that ended a drive in the 2nd that the Rams started across midfield was off both Britt’s hands. A really good WR comes down with that ball. Or catches the 4th-and-6 pass in the 4th that was off both Britt’s outstretched hands. Then there’s Brian Quick (2-8), who must believe every ball thrown TO him is actually being thrown AT him. He doesn’t catch balls as much as he tries to get them to stop attacking him. We saw it yet again in the 3rd, when he let a 3rd-and-9 back shoulder throw into his body and muffed it at the sideline. And do the Rams throw so many 3rd-down passes short of the sticks expecting a big WR to break a tackle? Does it ever happen? Britt and Cook blocked well on the Rams’ TD drive. Britt had a couple of catches that set up, well, the INT meant for Cook. Britt was wide open down the sideline on Foles’ last INT but the QB missed badly. But there’s still several drives a game you can count on the Rams’ big receivers to kill because they don’t play big, at least not consistently. Lance Kendricks’ blocking lately has been the epitome of someone not playing big. Unless he’s getting a good run at somebody, he’s getting nothing done as a lead blocker, and he looked very tentative in that role this week. Also, didn’t I hear the Rams signed Wes Welker (2-12) a while back? Where did he go? With the running game and screen game shut down, these guys needed to step up. At most, they did a little. There’s no one here who can, or maybe wants to, take over a game when time calls for it. All I see are guys happy to be well-compensated bit players on a (if they’re lucky) 5-11 team.

* Offensive line: Like the Wal-Mart greeter who gets to open the store on Black Friday, the Rams were immediately overrun up front and stayed that way. They blocked so poorly early on, it wasn’t apparent they were actually trying to obstruct the Bengals. No one blocked Dunlap on the first two runs, nor Iloka on the second. I’d put that on makeshift RT Garrett Reynolds, who I don’t think ever knew what he was supposed to be doing that opening series. I’m certain Iloka was supposed to be his block. And Dunlap was the guy in front of him, and usually going around him, all day. The Rams did not show the strength to win battles inside and did not show the speed or athleticism to block the Bengals on the move outside. They tried to move block for Gurley in the 1st and nearly got him buried after Kendricks whiffed horribly and Demetrious Rhaney let a LB run right by. Gurley made chicken salad out of um, those substandard ingredients, but Geno Atkins gave him the bird the next play, humiliating Tim Barnes and spinning Gurley down for a big loss. The Rams got the ball back at midfield only to have Atkins bury Tre Mason. He beat Rhaney AND Greg Robinson, who actually blocked him into the hole. Reynolds got beaten repeatedly as Foles tried to drive the Rams at the end of the half. Foles actually survived the first half without getting sacked (thanks to a defensive hold), but it didn’t last long. Atkins split Barnes and Cody Wichmann to drill him in the 3rd. Austin lost 5 to start the next drive because Cory Harkey ended up having to block Dunlap AND Iloka, and he whiffed on Dunlap. A quick screen to Austin went nowhere the next play because Robinson couldn’t lead out in time. Dunlap beat Reynolds for the millionth time to flush Foles into throwing his pick-six. Dunlap and Atkins weren’t the only Bengals at the party. Wallace Freaking Gilberry blew up a swing pass for Gurley in the 3rd by getting in Foles’ face. Robinson got beat in the 4th by Chris Carter, who does not do nothing but catch TDs, to rush Foles’ third INT. Carter and Frankenberry were a handful for the future Auburn draft bust the whole 2nd half. In the 4th, his whiff on Carter nearly got Gurley buried, then on 3rd-and-1, he took back a first down pass to Austin with his millionth holding penalty of the season, forced to tackle Dingleberry after getting beaten by the Bengal backup. On Foles’ final flailings late in the 4th, Wichmann got beaten badly by Dunlap rushing from DT to blow up a screen, then Robinson lost yet again to the immortal Huckleberry to force another bad throw. Where to start? Reynolds was awful, but at least he was playing out of position against a likely Pro Bowl DE. We knew the inexperienced Wichmann, the lightweight Barnes and the inexperienced AND lightweight Rhaney were going to have major trouble containing the Bengals’ dominant DTs, and they didn’t surprise us. And Robinson has gone full Jason Smith. Who in this league can he block if he’s going to get run over by backups every week? If not for Jared Cook’s blocking during the Rams’ only TD drive, I’m not sure the Rams landed a good block all game. They could not, and did not, start an NFL-quality line this week. The results made that obvious.

* Defensive line/LB: With Andy Dalton (20-27-233, 3 TD) getting the ball out quickly behind one of the NFL’s best offensive lines, and without Robert Quinn again this week, the Ram front had about as much impact as you’d expect: no sacks, 376 yards of total offense. Jeremy Hill (16-86) took off for 15 on Cincy’s first play, with the Rams getting no penetration at DT and James Laurinaitis getting taken out by the lead-blocking TE. Dalton beat a blitz with a shovel pass to Tyler Eifert for another 15, and the Bengals were on the way to their first TD. The D had Cincy 3-and-out to end the 1st. Eugene Sims tipped a pass, Michael Brockers blew up a run and Laurinaitis and Mark Barron shut down a screen to Gio Bernard. But special teams gave the Bengals the ball back and deflated the D. Dalton scrambled by Aaron Donald for 5. All the Rams but Sims (who got blocked) bit like amateurs on a 30-yard reverse that got Marvin Jones inside the 10. Rodney McLeod made a nice goal-line run stop, though, and Daren Bates a nice end zone pass breakup, to hold the Bengals to 3. Those looked like big plays when the offense drew to within 10-7. So what do the Rams do? (deflating balloon sound) They gave Dalton forever to dump off to Hill for 14. Hill made four Rams miss on a 3-yard run. Then he got 12 more up the gut as Laurinaitis got canceled out by the blocking TE again. Dalton mostly threw quickly, and the Rams didn’t get near him when he didn’t. Eifert made it 17-7 and it wouldn’t get any closer. Hill ground up clock in the 2nd half with Chris Long jumping inside too hard, or Donald or Laurinaitis overrunning the play, or Brockers getting knocked 10 feet downfield and pancaked. Fortunately, Will Hayes, with one of the few quality QB pressures of the day, got Dalton to throw a bad INT in the 3rd. Hayes was the only Ram lineman to get off the LOS that play. In the 3rd, the whole line overplayed a 52-yard screen to Bernard that set up another Bengal TD. Other teams’ DEs blow our screens up all the time; can we return the favor one of these days? Barron was one of the few bright spots, with 10 tackles and several clutch stops. The Rams didn’t give up much in the 4th, not that the Bengals were really trying. And you still had Donald whiffing, Hill running through a stupid overshift for a big gain, Hayes getting mauled by Andrew Whitworth, Laurinaitis and Akeem Ayers getting stumped in the hole. The Rams didn’t make plays and often didn’t get in place to make plays. The world’s most amateur scouting report mentioned last week that part of Cincy’s blocking strategy is to get defenders overplaying and wash them out of plays; the Rams never adjusted to it. Physical and strategic failure in the “war” in the trenches.

* Secondary: The Ram defense was ultimately doomed by a mistake-filled game in the secondary. 3rd-3 the opening drive, they’re playing tight zone coverage but Janoris Jenkins still lets A.J. Green (6-61, 2 TD) inside for a drag route and down to the 10. The next play, Jenkins and Rodney McLeod brilliantly jump a short route to the feared Mohammed Sanu while leaving Green open by five yards behind them for a simple TD. Another classic screwup by those two. Tyler Eifert faked Marcus Roberson (starting for injured Trumaine Johnson) into sitting on a short route the next drive and burned him deep, but McLeod saved Roberson’s bacon by blasting the catch away. In the 2nd, Daren Bates, not falling for the lineman-eligible play, saved the Rams 4 points with an excellent leaping pass breakup in the end zone. The Rams appeared to have settled down a little. Not for long. Bates and T.J. McDonald gave Eifert a free run down the right seam for a 21-yard TD. Gee, think you might want to cover a guy down there who has 11 TDs this year? Make it 12. After halftime, Jenkins got a gift INT from Andy Dalton and the Rams appeared to settle down again. Nope, not for long. Joyner and Mark Barron got blocked as Giovani Bernard took off with a simple screen pass for 52, then Green got another free run in the red zone for an 18-yard TD. James Laurinaitis didn’t get enough of a drop, McLeod didn’t close on him, ball game. The Rams have been FAR better than this in the red zone this season, but this week, they looked as confused in coverage as they have since the beginning of last season. This team’s latest very disappointing development.

* Special teams: Special teams stood out mostly for penalties, committing FIVE of the team’s seven. Back-to-back false starts on a punt that Johnny Hekker plonked into the end zone anyway. (Hekker clubbed his first punt a whole 37 yards to tee up Cincy’s opening TD drive.) Chase Reynolds ran into the punter to turn a 3-and-out into an 85-yard, nearly 7:00 FG drive. Holding by Bates on a kickoff to bury the Rams deep in their end for Hall’s pick-six. The only bright spot, possibly on this whole team, was Zach Hocker blasting a couple of kickoffs out the back of the end zone. WHO? He’s the emergency kicker the Rams had to pick up because Greg Zuerlein (hip) was out. With this week’s sloppy play, I have to reluctantly add STs coach John Fassel to this year’s list of Rams disappointments. I really thought special teams could put the Rams over the top this year. But like so much of this team, they’ve regressed instead.

* Strategery: Expecting Frank Cignetti to get a lot done in Cincinnati with this offensive line, these receivers, and a QB the team doesn’t want starting was not realistic. Breaking out the Wildcat formation a couple of times was creative and quite productive. He didn’t forget Austin this week and used him instead of just decoying with him. And after 10 weeks, the Ram offense finally discovered the slant route. But the Rams have scored four TDs in four weeks. Cignetti’s game plan was riddled with design flaws. I thought they needed more quick-developing plays like the quick slants. What was a slow fake end-around that sets up a slow screen pass to slow Britt supposed to be good for? Yeah, a loss. You know who has made a career out of getting open at the LOS within about a second? Wes Welker. Where was he? What was the only time Foles looked remotely comfortable all day? Running the 2:00 offense before halftime. So why not run no-huddle in the 2nd half? I’m not sure if a couple of plays were poor execution or poor design. Cook got a penalty attempting to run a route from the backfield before the snap one play. That’s great play design, IF you’re the Toronto Argonauts. Late in the game, Cincy’s been jumping quick screens all game, so they’ve got Bradley Marquez and Austin flanked right and running… the same route? Austin gets the ball but gets nowhere with Marquez’ route pulling in an extra defender. Huh? The Rams didn’t have the personnel on offense to get much of anywhere against Cincinnati. They didn’t have the game plan, either.

Gregg Williams’ defense didn’t seem very well prepared. I think he was trying to mix up coverages enough to confuse Dalton but ended up confusing his own guys instead. The number of zone coverage breakdowns was appalling, and communication back there was poor to the point that Williams should have just simplified everything and gone to man while it was still a game. Bengals OC Hue Jackson (once interviewed here for that role; Fisher hired Brian Schottenheimer) fooled Williams repeatedly, whether with screen passes away from blitz pressure or the Marvin Jones reverse that gave the entire defense whiplash. The Rams were off-balance and overpursued enough to make you think they weren’t coached up enough on Cincinnati’s style of play. Nothing happy to find in any of this happening at this point of the season.

I don’t know if Jeff Fisher is trying to win now, in the future, or ever. I don’t know why Gurley’s in the game in the 4th quarter down 31-7, getting a minor injury, and getting rolled right back out there. I don’t know why Welker’s back returning a punt at the end of the game. Not like that’s a high-velocity-impact-rich environment to send a guy with a concussion history into or anything. And I absolutely don’t know why Fisher was calling timeouts in the final minute of this dog. Bengals fans, Rams fans join you in booing that oddball move. All the times Fisher has failed to call timeouts in his time here and he’s using them then?

Does Kroenke think this brand of football is going to sell for long in any stadium in any city?

* Upon further review: Didn’t look like a very challenging game for Craig Wrolstead and crew. Fisher had a beef before the Bengal FG that he wasn’t getting proper opportunity to match up on defense. On the 52-yard screen to Bernard in the 3rd, T.J. McDonald took a blatant block in the back that would have called it all back and possibly stopped a TD drive. Not seeing much else, I’ll try to appreciate that an officiating crew having a quiet game is usually also having a good game. Grade: B-minus

* Cheers: If you ask Fox, the highlight of this week’s broadcast was Tony Siragusa’s porkpie hat, which I’m pretty sure he bought thinking it was made out of pork and/or had pie in it. Such keen analysis from Charles Davis and Siragusa that the Rams needed to run outside more after Gurley got stuffed up the middle a couple of times, when that was what the Rams tried first. And it didn’t work the rest of the game, either, except for one long run. Analyze that. Thom Brennaman read off Fisher’s coaching record at the end of the game like a rap sheet: 6 winning seasons in 21 as a head coach, no playoff win since 2003. Brennaman’s leading the Fire Fisher Brigade in the media, for whatever it ever amounts to.

* Who’s next?: The Rams return for what could be their final stand in St. Louis, three straight home games that will take this season down the homestretch. It’ll start with the team that might well leave vs. the team that did leave. The Rams broke a three-game losing streak in the series when they surprised Arizona in the desert in October, 24-22. That left them 7-8 there since moving to St. Louis, while they’re only 5-9 here.

The Rams won the first meeting this year behind clutch red zone defense, which will be difficult to repeat without Quinn, and was a very unusual performance against Carson Palmer this season anyway. He leads the league (yes, even Brady) in TD passes (27) and QB rating (108.9) and is 3rd in passing yards. Arizona is also tied for 5th for fewest sacks allowed. I mentioned in the first Arizona preview that Palmer’s improved footwork has really helped his line and his receivers, but now, he’s also getting some of the best line play he’s gotten as a Cardinal. LT Jared Veldheer was outstanding last Sunday night against the Bengals and RT Bobby Massie kept the feared Carlos Dunlap off the stat sheet. Veldheer and LG Mike Iupati really got the running game going on the left side. Chris Johnson is by far Arizona’s leading rusher and is a lot more patient than I remember, not trying to bounce everything outside. All the Arizona backs are good receivers, and with Larry Fitzgerald, are all huge options on screens. With the trouble that play has given the Rams lately, they HAVE to be on point against it for Arizona. And with Fitzgerald one of the league’s very best blocking WRs, Jenkins HAS to be able to get off blocks and prevent short passes from turning into big plays, which didn’t happen vs. Chicago and Baltimore. Gregg Williams is the one Rams DC in a decade to recognize Fitzgerald is the key to stopping the Cardinal offense and has been willing to devote extra attention to him. To get away with that, he’ll have to pressure Palmer enough to keep him from hitting one of his million deep threats, including John Brown, Jaron Brown, and now J.J. Nelson. (Michael Floyd, too, if his hamstring isn’t a bother.) Blitzing will get into Palmer’s head and get him making dumb throws. Williams got to him last time with safety blitzes. He’ll need Aaron Donald whipping center Lyle Sendlein up front, maybe from that 3-man front that’s disappeared from the Ram defense, to set the table for the DEs. Williams has solved the Cardinal offense before; the Rams will need some more successful equations from their defensive mad scientist.

Algebra isn’t the Rams’ strength on offense; it’s been a long time since they solved the Cardinal defense for C^2 or P^2. Calais Campbell had a season-high 10 tackles against them in October and has been blowing up Ram blocking schemes his entire career. So I really liked what Cincinnati did with him; they double-teamed a DT next to him and ran thattaway. Depending on his ankle injury, avoidance may also be the best policy with Patrick Peterson. He smothered A.J. Green last Sunday and asphyxiated Kenny Britt (0-0) in October. Whoever’s QBing the Rams, assuming he can get rid of the ball, will be much better off picking on Jerraud Powers. After getting burned by Austin (6-96, 2 TD) and Gurley (146 yards) in the first meeting, if anyone’s going to be ready for the Rams’ two-man show on offense, it’ll be Arizona. Their defensive calling card remains heavy blitzing. No one in their front has a lot of sacks, but they have a lot of players who can get to the QB, and that blitz made Cincy’s vaunted o-line look pretty average. The soft, gooey center of the Ram o-line (and the backs) will have to deal with a lot of blitzes right up the gut by Deon Bucannon from safety and by battering ram/LB Kevin Minter. Even if they can pick that up, Jason Sm, er, Greg Robinson will be more than challenged at LT. Rookie OLB Markus Golden was a handful for Andrew Whitworth, so he’ll be beating Robinson all game, and Dwight Freaking Freeney, who I did not know was still in the league, or a Cardinal, has 3 sacks in the last 4 games and is guaranteed to burn Robinson at least once as a spot rusher with his legendary spin move. OC Cignetti’s task again this week is to try to keep his QB from getting shelled. He’ll have to rely on draws and screens and the slant passes he’s finally discovered after 10-11 weeks. Gurley’s biggest successes in Arizona were behind move blockers, if Cignetti remembers what those are. (Preferably Harkey; Kendricks is useless.) And whether or not they’re running well, the Rams have to keep play-action in the game plan. This is always effective against Arizona because they are overaggressive. The Rams aren’t going to dictate anything on offense against Arizona, or probably anybody else this year. They’re going to have to learn to counterattack.

Jeff Fisher built a team designed to win games in the NFC West, where the Rams are 3-0, but forgot about the rest of the league, where they’re a dismal 1-7. And now that they’re back in the division for a week, they get a red-hot Cardinal team that’s won 5 in a row and has been waiting two months for payback. What might be the last shot St. Louis gets at Bill Bidwill doesn’t look like it’s going to end well.

— Mike
Game stats from espn.com

Concussions and their long term effects on the brain are beginning to be studied in public school students. Based on the results thus far some doctors are calling for the ban of tackle football in highschools.

But doesn’t it follow that college football should be banned for the same reasons (not that there’s a chance of that happening given the money involved)? Then what happens to the NFL if its farm system is abolished? Should it matter?

http://www.bioethics.net/2015/10/medical-ethics-and-school-football/

MEDICAL ETHICS AND SCHOOL FOOTBALL
by Steven H. Miles, MD and Shailendra Prasad, MD, MPH

This is a special pre-print posting of an editorial scheduled for the January 2016 issue of the American Journal of Bioethics.

Health professionals should call for ending public school tackle football programs. We disagree with the perspective and the argument of a recent report by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) that supports the current organization of reforms of youth tackle football.

About 1.1 million students play on junior and high school football teams. Another three million play in non-school programs. Youth football is slowly dying. The number of players on junior and high school football teams has fallen 2.4% over the last 5 years. Pop Warner Football, the largest non-school based program has seen its number of student athletes fall 9.5% (23,612 athletes) from 2010 to 2012. Data is not available for other youth leagues.

We agree with the AAP that the rare deaths (seven through October 2015) or catastrophic neck injuries do not, of themselves, tip the balance against school football. Tragedies occur in other sports and activities that young people pursue. Youth football also brings high risks of sprains, strains, ligamentous tears and fractures but these risks are roughly comparable to other sports.

Public schools should end their football programs because of the high prevalence of concussions. Five to twenty percent of students experience at least one concussion in a season of play. Nine to twelve year old players experience an average of 240 head impacts per season; high school players average 650 head impacts per season. An initial football concussion increases the risk of a subsequent concussion three or four fold not simply for the balance of that season but for the following season as well. Catastrophic brain injuries, though rare, are far more common in high school and college players who have experienced a previous non-catastrophic concussion. The brains of children are more susceptible to long-term damage from concussion than adults. Although the frequency of concussion in football is about the same as in hockey, fifty times as many students play football than hockey; football causes far more brain injuries. The brain is an irreplaceable organ, the health of which is foundational for the ability to learn, socialize and for fully realizing life’s physical and vocational opportunities.

Research about the consequences of school football for cognitive function is foreboding and evolving in a discouraging way. Youth football head trauma (aside from catastrophic brain, head and neck injuries) has not yet been proven to progress to the dementia, Parkinson’s disease, behavioral disorders, and mood disorders seen in professional players. Even so, school football concussions are often followed by weeks of impaired school academic performance, memory disturbances, headaches and absenteeism. High school cheerleaders have impaired cognition for at least days after a single concussion even when claiming to be asymptomatic. Cognitive dysfunction or neuron injury occurs after repetitive mild to moderate athletic concussions; catastrophic injuries or instances of prolonged loss of consciousness are not required to cause such harm. Even when measured cognition returns to baseline, symptoms of concussion often persist. A season of collegiate play leads to persistent cognitive dysfunction that is roughly proportional to the magnitude of head impact. One study shows that greater later-life cognitive impairment in NFL players is correlated with exposure to competitive football before twelve years of age. Evidence about the effect of youth football is evolving but is sufficient to show that school football is likely to adversely affecting school performance in the short term and may, if the trauma is not stopped, may proceed to permanent cognitive dysfunction over the long term.

A downward trend for deaths and for head and neck injuries is attributed to 1976 bans on head butting and spear and facemask tackles. However, these illegal tactics persisted despite bans. Students however do not reliably accept information about concussion and often fail to report concussive symptoms. Coaches inconsistently evaluate for signs of concussion and often fail to remove injured players from games.

Inevitably, lawsuits are being filed against youth football in the wake of the successful suit against the National Football League. In 2015, an Iowa court awarded a player a million dollars for negligence in diagnosing and acting on a concussion four years after the state had implemented legal reforms to reduce football injuries from head trauma. Pop Warner Football is being sued for the suicide a young player. A young athlete who suffered a severe concussion sued the Illinois High School Association (IHSA), asked a court to order medical testing of former high school players going back to 2002. The judge dismissed the suit paradoxically noting, “IHSA is simply a governmental entity charged with safeguarding student athletes . . . (Imposing) broader liability on this defendant would certainly change the sport of football and potentially harm it or cause it to be abandoned.” In other words, the potential harm to the athletic program itself counterbalanced the failure to protect against an actual severe concussion. At least three high schools in the country discontinued football programs this year due to concerns for player safety.

School football is caught between worsening scientific findings, evidence showing that new rules of play or coaching or equipment have a modest effect on concussions, parents who are not allowing their children to play, and lawsuits aimed at leagues and school personnel. Anecdotally, many prominent professional players, including Mike Ditka and Joe Namath, publically say that they would not let young relatives play football.

Un-informed Consent

Proponents of school tackle football, including the AAP, propose informed consent as the best way to ensure parents and children understand and accept the risks of school football. However, existing consent forms are deeply flawed. They do not quantify risk or they minimize it with misleadingly contextualization (e.g., “There is a degree of risk in all daily activities.”) The consent forms do not rebut the ungrounded hope of 26% of parents, especially those with economic and educational disadvantages, that their child will turn school participation in to a professional athletic career. Even when parents have been educated by the team and signed consent, many student players do not understand the symptoms or potential consequences of concussion.

An honest consent form for football might include language like this:

Concussion: “The risk of having at least one concussion in any season of play and practice is anywhere from one in five players to one in twenty players. It is not known how many of these students suffer more than one concussion. After one concussion, that the risk of additional concussion(s) in that season or in a following season is increased three or four fold. A concussion increases the risk of a later catastrophic brain or neck injury that may result in paralysis or death. Studies show that football concussions are highly likely to cause headaches and difficulty concentrating or performing schoolwork for a week, several weeks or even longer.

School football as a pathway to a professional football career: About one of every sixteen high school football players will play on a college team. About one in 1,200 high school football players ever play on a professional team. The average professional career is 3.3 years. Professional football players have much higher rates of depression, thinking problems, and physical disabilities than the general public.

Insurance: The team (has /does not have) a team physician/nurse to monitor for fitness to play. Such persons will try to detect athletes with concussions but their success at preventing concussions or other injuries is very limited. General medical insurance is the student’s responsibility. In the event of a catastrophic injury, the school does not provide or pay for long-term rehabilitation or vocational retraining, long term care or adaptive aids like crutches or wheelchairs. The school does not provide disability insurance for lost income.

The Dual Loyalty Problem of School Football

Medical ethics often addresses issues of dual loyalties. In such issues, the physician’s primary duty to a patient’s choice and well-being is potentially compromised by a contending personal interest or institutional pressure. Dual loyalty conflicts are seen in prison health care, military medicine, occupational medicine, research with human subjects and so on. Dual loyalties can affect a team physician or coach’s assessment and counseling of an aspiring football player. Risks may be minimized as students sign up to play. The potential for training, equipment, rules and refereeing to reduce concussions may be overstated. Injured players may be prematurely permitted or encouraged to ‘choose’ to return to play. Such issues affect the authenticity of choices of students who are also influenced by appeals to ‘school spirit,’ the mirage of a pro career, or peer pressure especially in smaller communities that have few candidates to fill a team roster.

Dual loyalty conflicts also work at an institutional level. School football is big business and a large part of popular culture. It is fiercely protected as is evident in the words of a judge who dismisses an injured player’s lawsuit for fear it might “harm” the sport.

The AAP’s child-centered mission is “to attain optimal physical, mental, and social health and well-being for all infants, children, adolescents and young adults.” This mission unambiguously states that dual-loyalty conflicts must be resolved by keeping youths’ health paramount.

However, the AAP’s report on youth tackle football balances health with the interests of the youth football industry. Its lead authors are experts on the clinical science of sports injuries but both coach sports where concussions are frequent. The report inexplicably omits discussing the effects of concussion on academic performance (the reason for going to school). It argues for respecting the ‘choice’ to play without noting how that schools, parents, coaches or the unrealistic aspirations for a pro career may pressure ‘choice’. It fails to offer an evidence-based template for informed consent, essentially preserving the current model of consent as a liability waiver. The report is optimistically speculative as when it suggests that neck strengthening might decrease the catastrophic neck injuries or cautions that that raising the age at which tackling is allowed might increase injuries. Throughout, the report upholds the tradition of youth tackle football against “fundamental change” even though scientific evidence is clearly trending in the opposite direction.

As long as football is played, primary prevention of injuries with the best equipment, coaching, rules of play and procedures for assessing and managing players will be needed.

However, we believe that this is a time for “primordial prevention” that remediates “environmental, economic, social and behavioral conditions, cultural patterns of living known to increase the risk of disease.” For health care professionals, primordial prevention might commend ending support for football in public schools. By this option, health professionals would oppose public support for bonds to build stadiums or athletic facilities for junior or senior high school football. They would oppose public school programs granting academic credit for playing football or leave of absences for practice or games. Such a proposal would not ban youth football. Private play and private leagues, like the Pop Warner program, would continue. Young people choosing such programs would play purely for the game and not be lured by ‘school spirit.’ Health professionals would continue to promote life long exercise programs and school physical education programs. However, under this proposal, the medical community could help students, schools and society leave a sport on which the sun is setting.

• This topic was modified 10 years, 3 months ago by nittany ram.

RamView, November 22, 2015
Game #10: Ravens 16, Rams 13

Stick a fork in the Rams, who found every way to lose they possibly could and lost the worst-played football game of the season against the worst team they’ll see this season until they get home and look in the mirror. This season does not look salvageable at this point, and this coaching regime shouldn’t be.

Position by position:
* QB: Typical fan I am, I was calling for Nick Foles to be removed at halftime last week, and this week, I wanted to pull Case Keenum (12-26-136, 75.2 PR) in the 3rd quarter. Keenum got off to a decent start, hitting Kenny Britt for 16, the kind of downfield timing pass that has fled from Foles’ repertoire. Keenum made the most of his mobility, also an edge he has over Foles, late in the 1st. He rolled right, pump-faked to prevent a sack, pulled it down and fired deep while scrambling across the line of scrimmage (with his back foot just legal) for a long DPI drawn by Jared Cook. That set up a TD, but like any ball Keenum was called upon to throw more than 25 yards downfield, was well underthrown. After a 9-yard hitch to Britt early in the 2nd, Keenum didn’t complete a pass that counted the rest of the half. He threw well short of a well-covered (as always) Tavon Austin and was lucky to avoid an INT. He followed that with a poor sideline throw for Britt on 3rd down that never had a chance. Coming out of halftime, Keenum threw a bomb that came up so short, the refs picked up a flag for DPI because it was uncatchable. I don’t think I’ve ever seen that. Next pass, he misses Austin on an out route with a throw so bad it looked like the ball was tipped. It wasn’t. After an 0-for-7 stretch that made Steve Walsh look like John Elway, it sure looked like Foles Time to me. Or how about the following possession, when Keenum tripped coming out of center, tried a diving handoff to Todd Gurley, which naturally didn’t work and gave Baltimore the ball? Patience with Keenum seemed rewarded when he hit Lance Kendricks for a 30-yard TD to put the Rams up a seemingly insurmountable 13-3. But no lead is safe when Jeff Fisher’s Rams are on a mission to lose. They fumbled the ball away twice and let Baltimore tie the game. Keenum made a clutch play to get out of trouble and put the Rams in FG position late. He rolled left and had nothing, but found Benny Cunningham on the back side for a 20-yard play. So OF COURSE the Rams missed the FG. Baltimore didn’t want to win the game, either, and gave the Rams another late chance to break the tie. Instead it was a chance to break Keenum. Timmy Jernigan drilled his head into the ground on a free play. Keenum clutched his helmet, came up looking like a puppet with its strings cut, but STAYED IN THE GAME long enough to overthrow a pass and give up the game-losing fumble on a sack. Case Keenum was a total joke for about half the game, but was also a gamer who just about made enough plays to win it. Still, when he’s poor at throwing sideline passes, can’t throw much more than 20 yards downfield, doesn’t know how many fingers I’m holding up, and Jeff Fisher STILL considers him the best option at QB, it says a lot about the state of the St. Louis Rams in 2015.

* RB: The Sports Illustrated cover jinx got Todd Gurley (25-66), as the ground game never really got off the ground. He did score the Rams’ first TD on 3 runs inside the 10 behind Cory Harkey’s lead-blocking and Garrett Reynolds’ strong inside work. Todd had a very entertaining 5-yard run in the 2nd. He swept right and shoved down a useless Lance Kendricks and classically leg-pumped his way through several tacklers. That set up a 3rd-and-1, though, where everyone knew Gurley was getting the ball and Baltimore dropped him for a loss. That’s the problem right now, everyone knows Gurley’s getting the ball because the Rams have little else. Gurley found less and less running room, and soon, not even clean handoffs. Keenum tripped and blew one in the 3rd for one turnover. Brandon Williams met Gurley well behind the line early in the 4th and punched out another. Gurley didn’t see much/enough of the ball in the 2nd half until Baltimore tied the game at 13. With the Ravens thinking pass, Gurley knocked out 16 yards on 3 carries to kick off a drive that got the Rams in FG position. Gurley never had a breakaway run; his longest carry was 7 yards, and the Rams did not seem likely to win under those conditions. They seemed even less likely while getting Gurley 6 carries over most of the second half of a game they should have been putting away.

* Receivers: The Rams got a couple of big plays at tight end. Jared Cook (4-31) beat Jimmy Smith deep and drew a 49-yard interference penalty that set up the Rams’ first TD. Lance Kendricks (2-43) got wide open on the backside of a fake rollout play and put the Rams up 13-3 with a 30-yard TD catch. No such impact yet again at WR. Kenny Britt (2-24) was pretty much done after catching the first pass of the game. He and Keenum weren’t in the same book, let alone on the same page, on a couple of blitz adjustments. Tavon Austin’s (1-5) 16-yard end-around set up Kendricks’ TD, but he was mostly a decoy. He wasn’t open for a step, again, on the one deep ball tried his way and he had a drop to start the Rams’ final drive. Wes Welker (2-13) made a couple of nice grabs but was barely a factor in the offense. Keenum’s mobility bought the receivers extra time, but the only time it seemed to matter was on Cook’s long DPI. I doubt any QB short of Russell Wilson has enough mobility to give any of these guys the time they need to get open.

* Offensive line: Last week’s injuries turned the o-line depth chart into an impossible shell game. The plan was to move Garrett Reynolds to LG and give Andrew Donnal and Cody Wichmann their first career starts at RT and RG, respectively. This held up for a quarter thanks to excellent run-blocking by Reynolds and Cory Harkey. From the 10 after Cook’s long DPI, Gurley followed Harkey and Reynolds for 4, then Harkey for 5 more, with Reynolds and Greg Robinson really bending the edge back. Gurley scored behind a strong combo block by Donnal and pulling Reynolds. But Donnal, whom the Rams drafted despite a myriad of injuries in college, lasted barely a quarter before bowing out with a season-ending knee injury. That’s a hidden play of the game. It forced Reynolds to kick out to RT, Wichmann to LG and put Demetrious Rhaney in at RG, and the Rams rarely competed well on the line afterward. Reynolds had been the only thing holding up Tim Barnes’ and Wichmann’s soft play in the middle. He started getting beaten both pass- and run-blocking as soon as he got out to RT. Robinson’s bitterly disappointing play continued with YET ANOTHER holding penalty to start off the 2nd. Gurley couldn’t convert 3rd-and-1 the next drive after Robinson and Wichmann got blown up. The middle line could not handle Brandon Williams. Gurley got stuffed again the following drive after Robinson and Barnes got pushed well back. Then Courtney Upshaw rolled past Robinson off the snap on 3rd down to force Keenum to scramble wildly. Barnes, who created a false start in the 1st half by forgetting the snap count, (note: he is the CENTER) remained a liability in the 2nd, getting blown off the ball and failing to get to his spot in time on pull blocks. After success with Harkey lead-blocking, the Rams got away from that, but Lance Kendricks continues only to be useful as a move blocker. They rely too often on him to make in-line blocks, like when he didn’t block Elvis Dumervil at all as Gurley got stuffed early in the 2nd. Rhaney was also a weak link. Williams smoked him when he forced the critical Gurley fumble in the 4th. Robinson helped get Gurley going to start a drive late in the 4th, but it bogged down into a FG try (that missed) after Rhaney was beaten inside and Barnes pushed back to get Gurley stopped again. Barnes lost a hand-fight with Timmy Jernigan badly on the play where Keenum was concussed, while Robinson idiotically shoved Upshaw RIGHT TO Keenum to force the game-losing fumble. Way to get your QB blindsided, Robinson. The Rams ultimately proved superior at finding ways to lose as a decade-long broken record of o-line injuries and failed high draft picks keeps scratching on.

* Defensive line/LB: As usual, it was up to the Ram defense to carry the sputtering offense, and as has been the case lately, it was up to Aaron Donald to do a lot of the carrying. Justin Forsett (4-26) got off to a strong start. They started out running at Will Hayes, who was getting blocked 10 feet out of plays and not getting much help from Michael Brockers or James Laurinaitis. Forsett had 10- and 18-yard runs before Nick Fairley stopped the opening drive with a 3rd-down pressure on Joe Flacco. Donald brought Forsett’s day to an unfortunate end the next drive. He beat a pull block (ha, someone thought they could block Aaron Donald with a pull block) and slammed Forsett to the ground for a 5-yard loss and a season-ending broken arm. Laurinaitis stopped Jeremy Butler on a 3rd-down pass to force a FG attempt that missed, giving the Rams momentum. Hayes stuffed Buck Allen to start a 3-and-out to end the 1st. Laurinaitis had a run stop and pressured Flacco for a 3-and-out in the 2nd. After Tavon Austin muffed a punt, the D made a heck of a defensive stand to hold the Ravens to a FG. Donald shot past the center to stuff Allen for a loss, along with Mark Barron. Baltimore beat a blitz and got inside the 10, but Barron then made an excellent open-field play to blow up a swing pass to Kyle Juszczyk. Donald then split the LT and the LG to sack Flacco back at the 20 to send in the kicker. The Rams kept momentum into the 2nd half. Eugene Sims drew a hold to move Baltimore out of FG range, Laurinaitis and Brockers played a draw to Allen perfectly, and when the Ravens crazily went for it on 4th-11, Laurinaitis was all over Juszczyk to stop him well short on a dumpoff. More 3-and-outs followed. Fairley stuffed Allen, then Laurinaitis and Sims blew up and strung out a dumb 3rd-and-1 run that made the Ravens look like they were quitting. The Rams only got the one sack by Donald, but pressured Flacco effectively throughout mostly with 4-man rushes. Hayes and Sims, then Fairley on 3rd down, forced bad Flacco throws for another 3-and-out. The Ravens didn’t quit, though, and the Rams started slipping up in the 4th. Allen beat them for 14 on 3rd-and-2 on a simple dumpoff. Crockett Gillmore got open between Laurinaitis and Barron at the Ram 10 and carried them down to the 3 on a 16-yard gain. That led to a TD, but the front 7 prevented another one after a long gain by Gillmore later. Hayes stuffed Allen and Barron tackled Kamar Aiken at the 1 to help force a tying FG. The last fumble by woozy Keenum was a bridge too far, though. Allen ran for 8 as Brockers and Laurinaitis got blocked, and he ran over Brockers and Donald for 5 more to put the Ravens in winning FG range. They weren’t perfect, but even without Robert Quinn and with Chris Long just back from a knee injury, the Rams were more than good enough up front this week. Ultimately there’s only so much bad offense they can cover up for.

* Secondary: The Ram secondary was barely tested downfield at all by Joe Flacco (27-44-299) and the Ravens’ dysfunctional passing game, but they still had their challenges. One was tackling Crockett Gillmore (5-101), who they made look like Mike Ditka crossed with Mark Bavaro. After T.J. McDonald got faked out by play action, Gillmore was wide open for a short pass in the 1st and ran through Janoris Jenkins for 20. The Rams had much more success against old friend Chris Givens (2-25), who tried to talk smack harder than he tried to run routes. Jenkins broke up a pass for Givens to seal a 3-and-out to start the 2nd. The Rams got a couple of INTs off Flacco that were probably easier than any catches they had to make in pregame warmups. Flacco airmailed a terrible pass right to Rodney McLeod in the 2nd. In the 3rd, Trumaine Johnson defended a deep pass to help get another 3-and-out. When the offense gave the ball right back, TruJo took it right back, grabbing a terrible Flacco floater and returning it across midfield to set up a TD. 13-3 seemed like an insurmountable lead, but at the goal line in the 4th, McDonald got caught in a pick and a freed Kamar Aiken (5-50) beat Marcus Roberson for a TD. The Rams started the next drive by leaving Aiken all alone down the seam for 17, then leaving Gillmore wide open in the flat for a painful 46 on the same kind of play Chicago burned them on the week before. After that, Jenkins and McLeod combined with a nice goal line play to stop a rollout pass and force a Raven FG. Flacco rang up a lot of yards on a lot of short passes. The DBs could have tackled better (especially Gillmore), and they got beaten on several blitzes. It’s still fair to say they had a decent amount of control over Baltimore’s dreadful passing game.

* Special teams: Oh, the horror, the kickers had to kick OUTDOORS again this week. What’s the excuse this time? Typhoon Omar? Hurricane Edgar? Johnny Hekker was about as consistent as the St. Louis weather. After a 61-yard punt that was downed at the 1 nicely by Bradley Marquez and Cody Davis, he chunked a 38-yarder, hit a 30-yard goofball to “pin” the Ravens at their 19 and plonked a 40-yarder into the end zone. Then he hit a 63-yarder. Greg Zuerlein’s day was a mess. He had an extra point blocked that I think he shanked, but the official blame’s going to the blocking on the play. With 1:42 left, the best the Ram offense could do was to get him a 52-yard attempt to take the lead; he missed wide right. Tavon Austin’s day was a total bust. He lost five on one return trying to sweep left with it. He brilliantly signaled fair catch on another and still attempted to return it. And, his poorest play of a poor game: misjudging a punt right before halftime, kneeling and reaching out for it instead of letting it bounce, and muffing it back to the Ravens to set up a FG. Special teams cost the Rams 7 points in a game they lost by three. Never a dull day.

* Strategery: The head coach and coordinators all stink at their jobs right now. Jeff Fisher’s approach to concussions suggests he had one himself this week. I’d like to know why anyone on the Ram sideline thought it was a good idea to keep Keenum in the game after he got knocked for a loop. (Or, for that matter, while he was spraying passes around in the 3rd.) And why put the concussion-prone Welker back with Austin on punts? Is that really a great idea, Welker blocking guys with a 50-yard head of steam?

Both coordinators failed when they got away from what was already working. Like he usually does, Frank Cignetti got away from play-action too early. I didn’t see Baltimore ever stop Gurley following lead blocks from Harkey at fullback, but Cignetti got away from those, too. Gurley got stuffed twice on 3rd-and-1’s on very predictable runs right up the middle, and I don’t think either of those or either of the fumbles involving Gurley were plays that had him running behind a fullback. Also, way too many fakes to Austin without ever actually handing him the ball slowed down too many plays. The Rams need to be a lot quicker-hitting, especially behind the o-line they fielded this week. All those fakes set up exactly one handoff to Austin, which did go for 16, but wasn’t worth the number of fakes invested in it. Baltimore quit worrying about him after about the third fake. The TD call to Kendricks was a sweet one I think Josh McDaniels ran a few times here. Fake play-action rollout, come back to the TE on the backside. And it was clever to start the late FG attempt drive with handoffs to Gurley. Cignetti definitely caught them expecting pass and got that drive off to a good start. Despite those moments, this just wasn’t a cohesive gameplan. Don’t get away from plays that work and keep going back to plays that don’t. Seems like that should be Coaching 101.

Gregg Williams also skipped that class. I liked his first-half plan for its simplicity. Baltimore was never much of a threat to get the ball downfield, so Williams blitzed very little. The d-line didn’t get to Flacco with sacks, but got pressure, and that was plenty to thwart their very limited passing game. I would have been happy to just stick an extra man in the box in the 2nd half to shut down the successful runs. Nope, Williams came out of halftime blitzing. Flacco burned an all-LB blitz for 25 with a quick slant on 3rd-7. The Rams went back to failing to stop simple dumpoffs out of the backfield, even though Baltimore couldn’t get anything accomplished downfield. Then Gillmore beat soft zone coverage, which I don’t think Williams had used much, to set up the Aiken TD. Gillmore’s catch to set up the tying TD was a repeat of the Chicago game. Williams got caught blitzing Ayers, who would have normally covered the receiver who’s wide open instead and turning a simple pass in the flat into a 46-yard gain.

This is supposed to be a coaching staff that knows how to win. Instead, they find as many ways to lose as their players do. I really believe they’ve assembled the parts for a winning team here, but these guys are just never going to put it all together.

* Upon further review: Unbelievably, in a season where the Rams have seen Jeff Triplette twice, Tony Corrente’s crew managed to call the worst game of the season. He deserves the dishonor strictly for the play that got Keenum knocked woozy. Dumervil jumps into the neutral zone, stops, but is unabated to the QB. IMO the play should have been blown dead right there. Even if I’m wrong, it’s Corrente’s damn job not to let the QB get killed on a free play, and with Jernigan on top of Keenum, the play should have been getting blown dead. If Corrente’s doing his job, either Keenum’s still intact after the play, or it’s 15 on Jernigan for a late hit. But, no whistle, no late hit, woozy QB fumbles two plays later, Baltimore’s almost immediately in FG position. Wait a minute, woozy QB? How in the hell did Keenum stay on the field after a hit that had him literally holding his head in pain? And when he’s a total rag doll when his lineman initially tries to help him up? What the hell is the league DOCTOR doing while this is going on, eating crab cakes? Earlier, there was Keenum’s “backward” pass, thrown from the 27 but spotted at the 29, and in what universe is that BACKWARD? Will Hill brought Keenum down excessively late when Baltimore blew up a screen late in the 3rd. Marquez’ 30-yard catch-and-run in the 2nd never should have been called back because none of the penalties should have been called. The personal fouls after the play likely would have been avoided had the whistle been properly blown when Marquez was down. At least then the dubious illegal block called on Britt, whose man was going down on his own to tackle Marquez, would have been a spot foul, I think. Corrente did too much else wrong for me to get this recap in before Thanksgiving. Grade: Big fat F-minus

* Cheers: Today’s breaking news: not only did Tre Mason and Isaiah (Claude Wroten 2.0) Battle miss the team bus Saturday (and therefore the team flight), did you know Mason has been missing meetings and skipping treatments all season? How does Moose Johnston know this, when he does maybe two Rams games a year, and none of the regular Rams reporters do? Has anyone checked, maybe Moose talks to Kroenke, too! Moose failed to explain why Mason is still in a Ram uniform, but still, good job on the scoop.

* Who’s next?: Here’s an omen: the Rams’ last two games against the Cincinnati Bengals have been losses behind backup QBs: Kellen Clemens in 2011, Brock Berlin in 2007. Lotsa luck to anybody expecting Case Keenum to reverse that trend, even though Cincy’s lost two straight after an 8-0 start.

The Rams sure as hell aren’t going to beat the Bengals in a shootout like Arizona did; they’ll have to follow the script from Houston’s 10-6 victory last Monday night if they’re going to have any chance at all. Cincinnati’s offensive line has one of the best reputations of any line in the league. Pro Football Focus grades them the most efficient pass-blocking unit going all the way back to 2007. LT Andrew Whitworth is one of the league’s best blindside protectors and didn’t allow a sack all of 2014. Clint Boling and Kevin Zeitler both grade out as 6th-best in the league at their guard positions. Boling hadn’t allowed a sack in his first 360 snaps this season. Sports Illustrated had an in-depth piece on the Bengal line, and, skipping the details, they’re coached to pass-protect differently than any other team does, and it’s something the Ram line will have to adjust to. If they don’t, they’ll just get swept past Andy Dalton for 60 minutes. Dalton is having the best season of his career (and carrying my fantasy team). Cincy’s up at the top of the league in yards per play, yards per pass attempt, and most importantly, points per game. His decision-making and deep accuracy have both come a long way. The Texans solved him by first taking away the deep ball. Johnathan Joseph made A.J. Green pretty invisible. Green has had some games like that this year. They confused Dalton by mixing up their coverages and made him settle for tons of quick screens and checkdowns. Up front, they stunted the daylights out of the Bengals. Cincy acted like they’d never seen one. They even beat the unassailable Whitworth for a sack by my scoring. Houston also took advantage any time Tyler Eifert had to block somebody in pass pro. Eifert is approaching Gronk status as a red zone TE but did not block to his previous reputation against the Texans. They got into the Bengals’ heads with physical play and made Dalton impatient and got him forcing passes downfield into traffic. That’s a blueprint the Rams have the people to execute. They have to be aware of Giovani Bernard out of the backfield. They have to be aware that Dalton is a good enough runner to make read-option credible. They have to be alert to OC Hue Jackson’s array of bizarre line shifts. Jenkins has to prove Pro Bowl-worthy against Green. And they could really use a healthy Robert Quinn to fill the Whitney Mercilus role – he had a field day whipping up on Eifert. The 4-6 Rams can do to the Bengals what the 4-5 Texans did. I don’t expect it, but they can.

The Rams have to get the Bengals into a slugfest because I don’t see them doing much against Cincy’s defense. Their best hope is that injuries to leading sacker Carlos Dunlap (8.5), LB Vontaze Burfict and the surprisingly ageless Pacman Jones make them a little more ordinary. They’re not afraid to blitz, though I doubt they’ll need to much against the tattered Ram o-line. The Rams could be in a ton of trouble if they have to stop 6’6”, long-armed monster Dunlap with Garrett Reynolds. That has to be a 1-on-1 matchup because the Rams have no one in the middle who can compete with Geno Atkins, Aaron Donald’s primary competition for best DT in the league. Atkins is healthy again and already has 7 sacks. He and Domata Peko make up the best interior pass rush in the league, and I just don’t know how the Rams are going to stop them with Barnes, Wichmann and Rhaney. Throw quickly, Keenum. Burfict is a terrific hitter behind that line, and even if he is limited, Vincent Rey has been a tackling machine in his place. The Bengals hoard good cover corners. Dre Kirkpatrick was impressively sticky against DeAndre Hopkins. Pacman still gobbles up ground well at 32. Last year’s 1st-round pick Darqueze Dennard has played well yet has trouble getting on the field. Classic ballhawk Reggie Nelson already has 5 INTs. Front to back, both sides of the ball, the Bengals are a stacked team and a very, very legitimate Super Bowl contender.

This Rams season has been strange enough to perversely believe they’ll beat the Bengals. They beat Seattle and Arizona when no one expected it, didn’t they? But Jeff Fisher is in a spot now where he has to depend on a big upset to turn his season around. He can pull it off. I doubt he will. But he has to.

— Mike
Game stats from espn.com

Keenum in, Foles out as starting QB

Jim Thomas

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/keenum-in-foles-out-as-starting-qb/article_a0b08018-4332-58eb-9846-0f57b660505e.html

To say that Case Keenum’s return to St. Louis was on the undercard of quarterback trades last March 10 would be understatement.

When the Rams sent a seventh-rounder to the Houston Texans for Keenum, he thought he might get some air time that night on ESPN. No such luck. Alas, that was the same day the Rams swapped Sam Bradford to Philadelphia for Nick Foles.

Turns out Keenum’s SportsCenter moment is coming eight months later. On Monday, Rams coach Jeff Fisher announced that Foles was being benched in favor of Keenum, the former record-setting signal caller at the University of Houston.

Fisher stopped short of saying it’s Keenum’s job forever, but he made it pretty clear this isn’t a one-week trial, either.

“As I told Case, he doesn’t have a short leash,” Fisher said. “I’m gonna let him play. I’m gonna let him use his legs, and let him make some plays.”

Fisher’s track record, long before his time in St. Louis, is that he doesn’t make quarterback changes lightly and he doesn’t like quarterback controversies.

“It’s not a quarterback controversy,” Fisher said. “Right now, all three of those guys in the (quarterback) room understand exactly what’s going on. I talked to all three of them together, and I don’t expect Nick to like it because he’s a competitor. But he understands.”

Fisher said the decision to make a switch was a byproduct of looking at the big picture on offense and trying to combat its lack of production.

Little more than an hour before his regularly scheduled 5 p.m. media session Monday, Fisher said he met with Foles, Keenum and rookie Sean Mannion, plus quarterbacks coach Chris Weinke to discuss the change.

“This is my decision,” Fisher said. “Nobody came down the hall and said this is what we need to do. As I told the quarterbacks, the lack of production is not Nick’s fault. The lack of production is a collective offensive effort and coaching. But we need more production, and it starts with that position.”

The Rams (4-5) have scored fewer than 20 points in five of their nine games — all five of which were losses. They rank 31st in total offense and 32nd (or last) in passing offense.

Foles ranks 28th in completion percentage (56.6 percent) and is 29th in passer rating (79.5) among NFL quarterbacks. Overall, he just hasn’t seemed like the same quarterback since that four-interception day Oct. 11 against Green Bay, missing open receivers either through errant passes or just not seeing them, period.

On several occasions over the past several weeks, Fisher has made it a point to say the team needs play better around Foles. He reiterated that point Monday.

“The receivers need to play better, the tight ends need to play better, Greg Robinson needs to play better,” Fisher said. “Nick didn’t fumble the ball on the 17-yard line.”

No, that was backup running back Tre Mason against Chicago, leading to a Bears field goal.

“Nor did he give up two explosive plays over 80 yards,” Fisher continued.

No, that was the Rams’ defense yielding touchdown receptions of 87 yards to tight end Zach Miller and 83 yards to Jeremy Langford of the Bears.

“We all need to play better,” Fisher said. “But I’m confident right now this is the right decision for us as we move forward.”

In the Bradford trade, the Rams also sent Philadelphia a fifth-round pick in last spring’s draft in exchange for a fourth-round pick in 2015 (which the Rams used for offensive lineman Andrew Donnal) and a second-rounder in ’16.

The Rams could still owe Philly a fourth-round pick in 2016 if Bradford plays in fewer than 50 percent of the Eagles’ offensive plays this season. But even with Bradford now hurt, it doesn’t appear the Rams will end up owing the Eagles that pick.

“By no means do we regret the trade, by no means do we regret the extension,” Fisher said. “Nick is a good quarterback. He’s captain of the football team. But at this point, right now, based on where we are offensively, I feel like this is the direction we have to go. … Nick also understands that he eventually will be under center for us again.”

Before he had even thrown a pass in preseason play, the Rams signed Foles to a $26 million contract extension through the 2017 season on Aug. 7. The deal included $13.79 million in guaranteed money, plus incentives that could max out the contract at $39.5 million.

When asked how Foles could re-establish himself, Fisher said: “You know what? Nick just needs a break. He just needs a break right now. He’s going to continue to work. He’ll run scout team. He’ll be prepared to play. But he just needs to get more experience under his belt in this offense.”

Besides the terminology and scheme changes in coming to St. Louis from Philadelphia, Foles also had to re-acquaint himself with taking snaps under center.

“Nick is full of energy and he just loves to play, and he’s competitive,” Fisher said. “As I’ve said numerous times, even when things go bad, it’s OK (to Foles). He believes he’s gonna come back and get it done. That’s good. I love those qualities in him. I love the leadership qualities in him.

“… There was a few times when, had (Foles) been a little bit more patient and went through the progression, the ball would’ve gone to the correct place and we may have extended some drives,” Fisher said.

But for now and the immediate future, it’s all about Keenum, who finished his college career as the NCAA’s all-time leader in passing yards (19,127) and touchdown passes (155). Signed as an undrafted rookie by Houston in 2012, Keenum spent the entire 2012 season on the Texans’ practice squad.

He started eight games for Houston over the second half of the 2013 season following an injury to Matt Schaub but was waived at the end of the 2014 preseason and claimed by St. Louis.

Keenum spent the first seven games of last season on the Rams’ active roster without playing, then spent seven more games on the practice squad. But Houston re-signed him to its active roster last Dec. 15, and he started the final two games for the Texans — both victories.

Fisher was impressed enough with what he saw of Keenum on the practice field in 2014 to spend that seventh-round pick to get him back.

(Opening statement)
“Let me give you a little injury update here. Unfortunately, we’ve lost ‘J.B.,’ (G) Jamon (Brown) for the year. He’ll have season-ending surgery probably middle of this week. Last night, (T) Darrell Williams had season-ending surgery as well. He dislocated his wrist. Finished the game, the last four or five plays. Coincidentally, it happened on the same play, both injuries happened on the interception return. So, he’ll be lost for the remainder of the season as well. We got some good news on (T) Rob (Havenstein). Rob left the game with a calf injury and it’s not as significant as we feared last night. He’ll be day-to-day, possibly week-to-week, but he’ll be returning. So, at some point here we’ll be placing on injured reserve both J.B. and Darrell, which means our intention is to bring up (T) Isaiah (Battle) off the practice squad. Then we’re currently looking at other options right now. I don’t have any other information for you. We’re discussing stuff with our pro scouting department to see what our options are to get some depth in here and potentially some practice squad help. Unfortunately, it was a blow but we’ve got a good group of young players. I’m not going to go into detail as to who is going to play where for competitive reasons, but we’re planning that as we speak right now as far as (G) Cody (Wichmann) and (G/T) Andrew (Donnal) and what we do with (G/T) Garrett (Reynolds) and so on and so forth. We took a little blow but we’ll be fine. Fortunately we’ve got depth, we’ve got youth. These guys are going to become good players because of their experience. So, that’s where that is.

“(DE) Rob (Quinn) came in. Our goal was somewhere between 15 and 20 snaps. He got 14 snaps, on most of which he rushed. It’s good to get him back so I would expect to see his reps increase this week. (DE) Chris (Long) felt really good. I think we’ll get Chris back on the practice field this week and we’ll see where that goes. (S) T.J. (McDonald) got back, got through it. We had a couple little minor things but… We’re going to benefit from some rest this week. We’ve got a great opponent, a disappointed opponent in Baltimore, who suffered a difficult loss last night and lost a number of close games.

“Additionally, we’ve been over the last, probably say four to five weeks, been looking at the offense and the big picture of our offense and just the production of our offense. I’ve decided to go ahead and make a quarterback change. I’m going to go ahead and go with Case (Keenum). I have as of recently, an hour or so ago, talked to all three quarterbacks and (QB) Coach (Chris) Weinke. This is my decision. Nobody came down the hall and said, ‘This is what we need to do.’ This is my decision. As I told the quarterbacks, the lack of production is not Nick’s (Foles) fault. The lack of production is a collective offensive effort and coaching. But, I need more production and it starts with that position. As I told Case, he doesn’t have a short leash. We’re going to let him play. We’re going to use his legs and let him make some plays. Nick also understands that he eventually will be under center for us again. But, this is my decision based on what I think is best for this team offensively is to go this direction. By no means do we regret the trade. By no means do we regret the extension. Nick is a good quarterback. He’s captain of this football team. But at this point right now, based on where we are offensively, I feel this is the direction we have to go.”

(On his history of avoiding ‘quarterback controversies’)
“It’s not a quarterback controversy. Right now, all three of those guys in that room understand exactly what’s going on. I talked to all three of them together, like I said, and I don’t expect Nick to like it because he’s a competitor, but he understands. We’re going to move forward here. I’m not saying this is week-to-week, but this is what’s best right now for our team as we move forward from a production standpoint offensively. They all need to play better. The receivers need to play better. The tight ends need to play better. (T) Greg Robinson needs to play better. They all need to play better. Nick didn’t fumble the ball on the 17-yard line, nor did he give up two explosive plays for over 80 yards. It’s not his fault. We all need to play better. But I’m confident that right now this is the right decision for us as we move forward.”

(On trading for Keenum and what he saw from him last year)
“What we saw in Case here on the practice field was special. His instincts, his mobility, his arm strength, his anticipation. Mind you, it was just practice, he was running scout team. When he got to go two-minute against the defense, it was there. He’s won games. He’s proven it. He’s won games in Houston with a team that had significant injuries around him and he found ways to win games. We’re going to trust his mobility and his ability to extend plays and things, and just give us an offensive spark that we need.”

(On if the injuries to the offensive line factored into the decision to switch quarterbacks)
“Did not factor into it, no. I’ve been contemplating this prior to yesterday with the injuries.”

(On how well Keenum knows the offense)
“Knows the offense. Pays very particular attention to everything that we do. Whether it’s practice, or obviously he’s great in the meetings. He gets every call on the sideline. He knows exactly what’s going on. He hasn’t had a regular season practice rep on offense yet, but I promise you he’s going to get plenty of them this week.”

(On what Foles has to do to reestablish himself)
You know what, Nick just needs a break. He just needs a break right now. He’s going to continue to work. He’ll run scout team. He’ll be prepared to play. But, he just needs to get more experience under his belt in this offense. And we need to do a better job around him and I keep circling back to that. It’s not easy. It’s hard. But, to me it’s the right decision for us moving forward.”

(On if Foles looked uncomfortable on film)
“There were some routes that weren’t correctly run. There were some protection issues where he had pressure in his face. There were some opportunities where we had some people open when the ball should’ve been delivered on time and the ball should’ve been completed. Again, it’s not just yesterday. It’s over the last few weeks.”

(On his impressions of WR Wes Welker)
“He was exact in his plays. He ran the routes appropriately. He got open. We hit him a few times and missed him a few times. He looked like he’d been doing it for a long time, which is good to see.”

(On if he noticed if Foles was too hyped up)
“Nick is full of energy and he just loves to play and is competitive. As I’ve said numerous times, even when things go bad, it’s okay. He believes he’s going to come back and get it done – that’s good. I love those qualities in him. I love the leadership qualities in him. There was a few times when, had we been a little more patient and gone through the progression, the ball would’ve gone to the correct place and we may have extended some drives. Again, I go back to all of that. The offensive holdings and the third-and-17s that we had to overcome and the first-and-20s and those kind of things, they weren’t Nick. We have to all get better.”

(On if T Greg Robinson is making enough progress)
“He’s making progress from the standpoint of knowing exactly what to do, but how to do it has been a little inconsistent here as of late. So, we have to keep working with him. The holdings, sometimes they’re called, sometimes they’re not. But, if they’re looking at him as a grabber right now, then he’s got to keep his hands inside.”

(On the holds on Robinson in the last few games where he shoves the defender to the ground)
“When they stumble, when someone stumbles and you push them to the ground, it shouldn’t be a foul. Sometimes they’re called, sometimes they’re not.”

(On what he saw on the crack-back block penalty)
“I didn’t like it. I thought it was contact on the shoulder. The head was across and the contact was on the shoulder. I didn’t see any helmet-to-helmet contact. I wasn’t a fan of that call.”

(On if he noticed a crack-back block on the Bears’ screen-play touchdown)
“There was, yeah. There was a few of those that went unnoticed, yeah.”

(On if the Bears using two tight ends was unexpected)
“Their plan, well (WR) Alshon (Jeffery) didn’t play, he didn’t practice much during the week. And they had a good plan. Their plan was to come out with the two tight end stuff just to kind of reduce our defensive package. You come out with three wides – and of course (WR) Eddie (Royal) was out – so, you come out with three wides, you’re going to get a lot more exotic stuff. The two tight end package made sense for them. We anticipated that. So, the game wasn’t, from our defensive standpoint it wasn’t as exotic as it normal is. Especially on first and second down.”

(On if it’s tougher to blitz against two tight ends)
“Well, they weren’t going to get (QB) Jay (Cutler) hit. That was their deal. They were getting rid of the ball. Run the ball, get rid of it quick. It was a good plan. Since the start of the season, we’ve been tackling good. We’ve made some… I referenced (S) Rodney’s (McLeod) tackles on ‘AP’ (Vikings running back Adrian Peterson) last week up in Minnesota. We’ve done a really good job minimizing gains. Here, we give up two giant plays on what is in essence a two-yard flat route by a tight end and a screen pass to a back. That’s not good defensively.”

(On if he’s aware of the comments that were made by Jay Glazer on the FOX pregame show about the Bears complaining to the league about the Rams)
“I did not hear about it. It would surprise me that (Bears Head) Coach (John) Fox would do something like that. I would be surprised at that. Games are officiated…we all want more consistency as it relates to officiating the games. That’s what every head coach talks about is let’s gets consistency from crew to crew to crew. But, crews don’t come in and officiate games differently based on who the opponents are. They don’t do that. Now, there may be a formation issue or a motion issue or something like that that comes up or things like that that they’re alerted to. But, I find that hard to believe.”

(On Glazer having a close relationship with Bears Head Coach John Fox)
“Well, that’s their issue, not mine. We didn’t lose the game because of that. We lost the game because we gave up two big plays because on defense and weren’t productive offensively.”

(On what he thought about the roughing call made against S Mark Barron)
“Well, we had (Bears QB) Jay (Cutler) around the legs. Jay was going down and still had the ball, and Barron just came and tried to finish the tackle. (Referee) Jeff (Triplette) said he hit him with the crown of his helmet to his chest. I don’t know if Jeff was in position to see whether the crown or helmet or whether it was the hairline of the helmet, but sometimes those things are called.”

(On how he thinks QB Sean Mannion is progressing)
“He’s got a good feel for what we’re doing. He’s paying attention. He’s not getting reps. He’s getting very few scout team reps, but when he gets them, he’s doing fine. He puts our cards in our terminology and he’s doing fine. So, we’ll try to get him some more reps here as we push forward.”

(On if T Andrew Donnal and G Cody Wichmann will have bigger roles now due to injuries on the offensive line)
“Well, Andrew got to play last week. He got to start and played the whole game, so that’s valuable experience. Now, as we move forward, it looks like they’re both going to play. I mean, I’ve been pleased with Cody. Cody missed some time with the calf injury during camp, but since then, Coach (Paul) ‘Bou’s (Boudreau) getting him reps and he knows what to do – big strong guy who can pull and can pass protect. So, we’ll see.”

(On bringing T Isaiah Battle up to the active roster)
“From a conditioning standpoint and a lower body strength and overall strength standpoint, he’s much further ahead than he was when he got here. He wasn’t in good shape when he got here for obvious reasons, of supplemental and so we had to get him in shape. He’s done a really good job in the weight room. He has a much better feel for what we’re doing. He’s got really long arms. He’s athletic. So, I spoke with him today. He’s a snap away from playing.”

(On if C/G Demetrius Rhaney figures into the mix of offensive linemen)
“He does. Yes, as backup center/guard and all that.”

(On Rhaney being close to winning the center starting position during camp)
“He was very close, but (C) ‘Timmy’ (Tim Barnes) won it. I see ‘D’ as a center right now and see the other guys more as guards. So, he’s, in essence, your backup center.”

(On if G Garrett Reynolds has to play right tackle)
“(He) has done it before, yeah. So, we’ll plug him in. I’d be more concerned about my field goal protection right now than who’s playing on the offensive line.”

(On his thoughts about University of Missouri Football Head Coach Gary Pinkel’s announcing his retirement last week)
“Well, I’ve met him several times. Great respect for what he’s done and what he’s done in the program. It’s hard to walk away. It’s even harder to walk away on your own terms. But, when you make a decision based on his personal situation, his medical situation and his family situation, you can’t help but wish him the best of luck. They’re going to miss him. I mean, he’s going to miss ball and they’re going to miss him. He’s an outstanding man, outstanding coach.”

Rams chat with Jim Thomas

http://sports.live.stltoday.com/Event/Rams_chat_with_Jim_Thomas_f12090b610c8?Page=4

do you believe Bailey or Watts will ever play for the Rams again?
by bjf 2:00 PM

Believe Bailey will be back in December. Not so sure on Watts, who is out for rest of year.
by jthomas 2:01 PM

I didn’t think the QB trade look very good this weekend, you?
by Don 2:03 PM

No. Not this weekend. But it’s still way too early to judge. It’s interest thought, both teams are 4-4. The passer rating for Foles and Bradford are nearly identical.
by jthomas 2:04 PM

Jim – Do you think – as widely reported – that the relocation guidelines are essentially worthless?
by McGarrett 2:05 PM

In terms of a lawsuit, yes. Grubman has made that very clear throughout this entire process. That they’re just guildelines, not rules, not law. And that in the end it’s all up to a vote of the owners.
by jthomas 2:06 PM

How many games before Welker out with a concussion?
by Don 2:06 PM

Vegas probably already has an over/under on it. Obviously, you wish the guy good health.
by jthomas 2:07 PM

Should we expect Welker to play this Sunday?
by David 2:07 PM

Too early to tell. Let’s see what he does in practice this week.
by jthomas 2:07 PM

Frustrating to see third and long only to see the ball thrown well short of the stick. Why do they do this?
by LB 2:07 PM

It is irritating to see that.
by jthomas 2:08 PM

It looks like the Rams may have missed Havenstein this past weekend. Is he expected back against Chicago?
by Craig 2:08 PM

Think so. Fisher said he expects him to return to practice sometime this week.
by jthomas 2:08 PM

Hey Jim!
What was the report back on Maurice Alexanders game?
Looked to me like a willing hitter…but problems in coverage?
Looked like Bridgewaters walk in was a result of Maruice’s going after James L’s guy?
Actually looked like that kind of thing happened a couple of times.
Did he do alright for a first start?
by Michael Quesada 2:09 PM

Alexander wasn’t perfect. But Fisher was pleased. He said if the Rams had won the game Alexander would’ve gotten a game ball.
by jthomas 2:10 PM

Very nice of the Rams to have Vinny B, the LA writer, in their booth the past couple of Sundays. How nice of Kevin and StanK.
by John 2:10 PM

Saw him in the press box. Not aware that he was in the Rams’ suite. Don’t really care. In 1994, I was in the Rams’ suite several times with John Shaw.
by jthomas 2:11 PM

I think the Vikes showed how one dimensional the Rams are. The Rams put themselves in the hole from the git go by going for two. Then their inability to generate even one first down in OT was telling. How do they correct these shortcomings??
by LB 2:12 PM

Well, that’s the question isn’t it. They simply have to develop the passing game and do better on third down. I don’t have a magic answer for you. But it doesn’t figure to get any better this week against Chicago which is ranked 9th in total defense and 3rd in passing defense.
by jthomas 2:13 PM

can you comment on Greg Robinsons play 1 1/2 years into his Rams career?
by Greg in Raleigh 2:13 PM

Sure. He’s been an effective run blocker, and at times has shown the makings of a dominant overall left tackle. But as Fisher has mentioned, he has been inconsistent. Too often on passing downs, he lunges toward the pass-rusher and gets off-balance, instead of just staying patient and “catching” the pass-rusher. But I think he has the potential to be a very good LT. Even the great Orlando Pace didn’t make his first Pro Bowl until his third season in the league
by jthomas 2:17 PM

Great game by the D on Sunday taking out the 3rd QB this year. Which QB is next on Gregg William’s hitlist?
by Vince Ferragmo 2:18 PM

I don’t think they’re keeping score.
by jthomas 2:18 PM

As in golf, I see a changing of the guard. P. Manning, Brees, etc are fading, Newton, Mariota, etc are taking over. Agree?
by Don 2:18 PM

Well, there’s no doubt Manning is near the end. And obviously Brees and Brady are closer to the end of their careers than the beginning. I like Mariota, but I’m not ready to say he’s the next big thing midway through his rookie season.
by jthomas 2:19 PM

What do you think of the Welker get and will he make a contribution on and off the field, Does he have any thing left
by mdk 2:19 PM

I don’t know if he has anything left. We’ll see. but if he does, he can certainly help that awful third-down conversion rate.
by jthomas 2:20 PM

What happens to Welker once Bailey returns from his suspension?
by BP 2:20 PM

We’ll see.
by jthomas 2:21 PM

Good Day Jim, The 2 year signing of Foles before the season, not looking like the best idea, your opinion ?
by OzyRamsFan 2:21 PM

It was surprising to me at the time that the Rams decided to extend his contract without seeing him throw one pass in a Rams uniform even during the preseason.
by jthomas 2:22 PM

Do you think the passing of the stadium financing really helps anything? I’m skeptical that it’s all for show.
by Rk 2:22 PM

I do think it will help. St. Louis’ only chance to keep the Rams is if it has the best financing plan possible.
by jthomas 2:23 PM

What is there about drug policy that players don’t understand that it is violated so often?
by LB 2:23 PM

I know. Youth.
by jthomas 2:24 PM

It looked to me like Barnes was overpowered repeatedly by their DT’s, do you agree?
by Tom 2:24 PM

There’s no doubt he had his hands full with Linval Joseph. But a lot of O-linemen do.
by jthomas 2:25 PM

Hi Jim. I’m tired of hearing Fish’s excuses. (2 point play in first quarter) Has he ever admitted making ANY mistakes for play calling or schemes or anything else?
by Cutman 2:25 PM

He has, but it doesn’t happen all that often.
by jthomas 2:25 PM

Do you think it’s ok to cheer the signing of Welker given his concussion history? Plenty have reservations about Rams giving him another chance to hurt himself permanently.
by U.K. Ram 2:26 PM

It’s up to you whether you cheer or not. Keep in mind, Welker has done this voluntarily. No one dragged him to Rams Park and put a pen in his hands. Obviously, you hope for good health.
by jthomas 2:28 PM

What are the chances more likely to happen we finish 6-0 in the NFC West or we sneak into the Wildcard?
by Dwayne 2:28 PM

Well, the playoff chances would’ve been better with a win in Minnesota. It’s difficult for me to see the Rams sweeping their final 3 division games. I’m thinking 4-2 or 5-1 in the division. Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, Tampa Bay, and San Francisco all look like winnable games. That would get you to 9 victories.
by jthomas 2:30 PM

How much blame would you place for poor offensive output on the OC?
by Steve 2:30 PM

None. It’s all Schotty’s fault. Don’t we all agree on this?
by jthomas 2:30 PM

Were the Rams looking at other receivers that you know of and who would have you liked to see them sign
by mdk 2:30 PM

They also had Hakeem Nicks and Vincent Brown in for tryouts. Hard to say who else would be a better option than Welker. At this point in the season, there’s usually a reason why you’re unemployed.
by jthomas 2:31 PM

Ga. jim if i was the rams i wouldve traded for Johnny Football fisher offense thrive with a mobile QB your thoughts…
by roc 2:32 PM

No.
by jthomas 2:32 PM

Jumping ahead, who’s you pick to play in the SB?
by Don 2:32 PM

Right now it’s all Carolina and New England.
by jthomas 2:32 PM

That was a hell of a game. Again too many penalties. Killed a great chance to pin them deep in 4th. Was that you that pressed fish about how he can correct this problem? What a BS response!!
by Cutman 2:32 PM

There are usually only about 5 reporters at his Monday press conferences, so it may have been me.
by jthomas 2:33 PM

Is this the year we draft another wr in the 1st round?
by Sam Bradford 2:33 PM

Depends on what happens with all the pending free agents the Rams still have unsigned. If Jenkins, Johnson, McLeod and Barron all go, it just may be a DB.
by jthomas 2:34 PM

So, you won’t admit, I’m better than Nick?
by Sam Bradford 2:34 PM

Sam, I was happy for you Monday night. That was a great throw to Jordan Matthews for the game-winner. Best of luck. And it would be great to see a Philly-St. Louis playoff game.
by jthomas 2:35 PM

What do you think will come out of the meetings in NY tomorrow? If so, hopefully something positive for STL
by Rams 2:35 PM

No votes and no decisions are supposed to be made. But I think the owners will see that St. Louis is way ahead of the other home markets, for whatever that’s worth. We’re talking 17 owners from the 3 committees if all are on hand. So they will really get an understanding of what’s going on in St. Louis.
by jthomas 2:37 PM

Has StanK always had bodyguard’s watch over him while he tinkles or just this year?
by tinkle 2:37 PM

In such situations, I’m told it’s league policy to have security with owners. No, I’m not kidding.
by jthomas 2:38 PM

One thing I found funny was Fisher expressing how great of a loss Stedman Bailey will be on offense. Now, he is great special teams player, but offense? Do you think the rams should’ve made a move to sign a WR even if Bailey didn’t get suspended?
by Cole 2:38 PM

Well, Bailey’s has had his moments _ obviously just not as many as everyone would like. But it’s not like Fisher acted as if the Rams just lost Isaac Bruce for a month.
by jthomas 2:40 PM

Did he wash his hands?
by Gerald Reynolds 2:40 PM

I was watching the game, not the restroom on Sunday.
by jthomas 2:40 PM

Why NOT leave Reynolds at LG?
by LA Champ 2:40 PM

Fisher felt more comfortable with Reynolds at RT vs. Minny, particularly since he had played there against the Vikings last year while with Detroit.
by jthomas 2:41 PM

Other than Havenstien, Brown and G-rob how many new starters do you see on the OLine next season?
by Dwayne 2:41 PM

Rhaney may have a chance to beat out Barnes in 2016; and I don’t think we can say with certainty at this point if Saffold will be back.
by jthomas 2:42 PM

Was the phone call you received from Stan K’s security detail asking for the IP addresses of those posting questions about his restroom behavior?
by Dr. Feelgood 2:51 PM

OK, I’m back. Sorry. (It was a Wes Welker-related call.)
by jthomas 2:52 PM

At this point who do you think can offer more Welker or Givens? It’s a shame we gave up our deep threat for a late draft pick right.
by Dwayne 2:52 PM

I’m not going to disagree with you. Obviously, at the time the Rams traded Givens they probably didn’t know the suspension was coming.
by jthomas 2:53 PM

Jim this is Bailey second suspension why is it only 4 games and why is he still on he team guy is a non focttor
by Ty 2:53 PM

The first suspension was for PEDs, not for substance abuse.
by jthomas 2:54 PM

Rams finish 8-8, with wins over Chicago, Tampa, Detroit and at San Fran. Prove me wrong. It’s an average team at best, with a crappy head coach who hasn’t been to the playoffs in a long long time. Time for a new coach, and of course a new city.
by mzipprich 2:54 PM

Could very well end up at 8-8.
by jthomas 2:54 PM

Oh, I thought it was Stan.
by ramsfan 2:54 PM

Nope. 🙂
by jthomas 2:55 PM

Jim, is there a legitimate possible that the Rams can resign both Trumaine Johnson and Janoris Jenkins?
by Garrett 2:55 PM

Yes. They’ve got cap room.
by jthomas 2:55 PM

Thanks for the Rams chat Jim. I hope Welker plays well, has no health issues. What I liked about it is he has performed at a high level, been on winning teams and had playoff experience, maybe he can bring more leadership to the WRs? I know folks said Britt was being vocal early in the season but as a group they don’t seem to have energy, focus. Agree?
by Uncle Leo 2:55 PM

Oh, I think the WR group has energy. Not sure if the focus is always there.
by jthomas 2:56 PM

Jenkins is going to chase big money and I don’t think the Rams will pay.
by Uncle Leo 2:56 PM

Quite possible.
by jthomas 2:56 PM

Hi Jim, So Steven Jackson is fantastic but teams are stacking the box against him because Kyle Boller cant deliver consistent NFL production and anyway Donnie Avery and Randy McMichael cant get open or hang onto balls. Wait…what?
by Sacramento Ram 2:56 PM

Am I dreaming this?
by jthomas 2:56 PM

After watching the Bears win on the road and holding rivers in check how can we possibly be favored by 7.5?
by Cutman 2:57 PM

Fox is a good coach, and the Bears have been a tough out lately.
by jthomas 2:57 PM

Jim help me make sense of how Foles can throw 27 touchdowns in one season. All while only giving up 2 pick? I just can’t see it.
by Cutman 2:57 PM

I don’t think anyone is seeing it right now.
by jthomas 2:58 PM

Rams are at the point where their first draft class in 2012 are coming up for free agency, which one of the mainstay veterans are in trouble (Long, Cook, Saffold)?
by Garrett 2:58 PM

They all could be.
by jthomas 2:58 PM

I know Jeff Fisher does not need me to stick up for him but pretty hilarious to hear Rodney Harrison call out Jeff Fisher! One of the dirtiest players to ever play in the NFL. What a clown that guy is! I can’t stand to watch the NBC pregame with him on it.
by NJRamsFan 2:58 PM

It is pretty amazing. I’m surprised that someone among the NBC group of “talent” working the game didn’t give Harrison a little reality check. Something along the lines of “Really, Rodney? You weren’t exactly an angel out there.”
by jthomas 2:59 PM

Why is there such a big deal about the hit on the Vikings QB? Must be something about Minnesota since they were whining about the totally legal hits I was giving out last year in the playoffs. Say hi to Rutherford for me.
by Steve Ott 3:00 PM

From reading the Minnesota coverage, you would’ve have thought Bridgewater was bludgeoned with a sharp instrument and will never recover. I’m sure the Rams would’ve been upset if something had happened to Foles. But I’ve seen a lot of far dirtier plays. Joyner was wrong, he felt terrible about it, and he will be fined.
by jthomas 3:03 PM

Is it crazy to say the Rams have a formula to win the NFC? They have an elite defense, good STs, a transcendent RB (Gurley), a big play wide out (Austin). Not much different than Seattle, but the QB is the difference. If Foles is even average, this team has a legitimate formula in place to run the table and go to the Super Bowl, no? Great D, run the ball, and big play ability
by Garrett 3:03 PM

I agree, if the rams were even average in the passing game they’d have a real chance.
by jthomas 3:04 PM

Thanks Jim, Say the Rams fall short of the playoffs this season at 8-8 or 9-7 and they make the playoffs in 2016. Does Fisher get his contract renewd or no?
by Dwayne 3:04 PM

Probably. But you’re asking the wrong guy.
by jthomas 3:05 PM

Apathy is setting in for me. Same Old story: Inconsistent QB play, questionable coaching decisions, never ending penalties, playing down to opponent and one more unexpected loss we are again starring at 8-8. When is this going to end JT?
by Mark D 3:05 PM

“Again starting at 8-8?” Rams haven’t stared at 8-8 since 2006. That’s nearly a decade ago. But I feel your pain.
by jthomas 3:06 PM

I remember people when Jim Everett was criticized for having happy. Do you think Foles is coming down with a case of the same thing? Granted he has been hit pretty hard this year, and his accuracy has seemed to suffer as a result…
by DJM34 3:06 PM

With the exception of the Green Bay game, I don’t think Foles has been hit all that hard this year.
by jthomas 3:07 PM

Rhetorical question: Has Brian Quick done enough to earn his next contract?
by Craig 3:07 PM

Probably not in St. Louis.
by jthomas 3:07 PM

What a true shame that the Rams are so unbalanced and that the defense is having to keep them in games. Fisher and the FO have failed to build a competent O-line that can consistently open lanes for TG and protect a QB that is already exhibiting signs of pocket PTSD.
by John 3:09 PM

I don’t think we can blame the line _ and just the line _ for all this. Granted the Rams aren’t throwing as much as most teams, but Foles has been sacked 12 times in 8 games. That’s tied for the sixth-lowest total in the league.
by jthomas 3:11 PM

does the organization believe that the teams passing games problems are with the qb or the wrs?
by bjf 3:11 PM

They think it’s a global solution. QB, receivers, blockers all have to play better. Coaches have to coach better.
by jthomas 3:12 PM

Jim, can someone tell Zimmer to get off his perch, did he not see the “cheap shot” that Joseph took on Foles when he threw his elbow into the neck and chin of Foles, last time I checked they don’t throw personal fouls/unnecessary roughness penalties on a team for playing within the rules and playing clean…secondly, after 8 games, how would you rate Foles, to me he looks like nothing more than a very good back up QB, I would not even rate his play as a “quality starter” let alone a franchise QB like he’s being paid, could the rams be in the FA market at the end of the year and go after someone like, say, Sam Bradford………
by T.J 3:12 PM

First off, there’s a little too much “pure as the driven snow” stuff coming from the Vikings, that’s for sure. As for Foles, he’s being paid well but he’s not being paid like a franchise QB. There’s no doubt the Rams need better play from the position.
by jthomas 3:14 PM

Andrew Donnal had a brutal day against Linval Joseph. Based on preseason games, it seemed to the uneducated that leaving Garrett Reynolds at LG and playing Darrell Williams at RT was a safer place to go. Boudreau seems to like to play versatility to ensure best 5 in lineup each game. Was the starting lineup what you expected or did that give you pause as it did me at gametime? It clearly wasn’t working, why stay with it?
by Touareg 3:15 PM

I was not surprised at all. The combination they opened the game with was one they had used much of the week. Donnal indeed had some tough moments, but what makes you think Darrell Williams would’ve played better?
by jthomas 3:16 PM

Who should I blame for the poor QB play, OL, OC, WR, Foles or schotty? Our TE’s are below average as well, I guess there is plenty of balme to go around
by Greg in Raleigh 3:17 PM

Blame them all.
by jthomas 3:17 PM

Regarding a prediction on Gurley leading the NFL in rushing this year, do we still have to pump the brakes or can we now step on the gas?
by David 3:17 PM

I would say you can go 5 to 10 miles above the speed limit at this point. The Vikings did contain him and I’m sure teams will continue to load the box and dare the Rams to beat them with the pass.
by jthomas 3:19 PM

Hey Jim I’m one of the few guys that wish we would have kept Sam in your opinion are we a better team with a healthy Bradford.
by Randy 3:19 PM

I think so. But we all know the health issue was a big if.
by jthomas 3:19 PM

any word when Long will be back, ogletree?
by Greg in Raleigh 3:19 PM

The earlier Ogletree can return is Game 15 vs. Seattle. As for Long, I still think it’s at least a couple of weeks.
by jthomas 3:20 PM

Do you think our QB is awful or our WRs are awful? Hard to tell from just watching games where the issue is with our non-existent passing game.
by Joe from Hazelwood 3:20 PM

Again, they all can do better. Foles missed several throws Sunday. The receivers can do a better job gaining separation and catching the ball.
by jthomas 3:21 PM

What’s your opinion on Trumaine Johnson this season?? He stayed relatively healthy so far n has played better..can the Rams sign both Johnson n Jenkins?
by JGib 3:22 PM

I didn’t get to mention it in any of my game coverage, but that was quite the INT by Johnson on that deep ball in Minnesota. I think he’s playing pretty well. So far it’s his most consistent season. Yes, the Rams can afford to sign both.
by jthomas 3:23 PM

If the Board of Alderman pass the vote & the NFL / Rams think that they have to give the Rams the Naming Rights & game day taxes for construction, will it go back to Task Force and then again to BoA or does that mean its DOA at that point and time?
by Touareg 3:25 PM

No time for all that.
by jthomas 3:25 PM

Did I hear correctly that Zuerlein’s 61-yard FG was the 2nd longest in NFl history?
by Craig 3:25 PM

No. I believe it’s tied for 7th longest in NFL history.
by jthomas 3:26 PM

It’s moot now, but I still think, if built the county would have been a better location. What say ye?
by Don 3:27 PM

Why would the county be better?
by jthomas 3:27 PM
Permalink

If the Rams fail to make the playoffs or having a winning record due to the Minn lose, will Fisher have the wear it, the not trying extra point looks big in hindsight
by OzyRamsFan 3:28 PM

It’s a game that might come back to haunt them by mid December.
by jthomas 3:28 PM

Hochman was really hard on Foles. While he hasn’t been an impact player at the position , is he really that bad? The Rams have a slow developing offensive line , and that certainly plays a part in this. Any thoughts?
by Dave 3:28 PM

Ben is paid to write opinion. Foles ranks near the bottom of the league in passer rating, third-down passer rating, fourth-quarter passer rating.
by jthomas 3:30 PM

Seriously, Jim, when are Snead and Fisher going to be held accountable for this shoddy job of assembling a roster? Pead was a bust, Quick looks more and more like one, Bailey can’t stay out of trouble, Foles looks mostly lousy, the tight ends can’t catch, the OL is a sieve…the list goes on. Does anyone REALLY think this is a playoff team?
by Frank 3:31 PM

My bad. I didn’t realize the Rams were 0-8.
by jthomas 3:31 PM

Asking for nothing more than your best guess, what does NFL football look like in STL in 2020?
by Gerald Reynolds 3:31 PM

I’m still at 46-54 the Rams stay. If they end up in LA in 2016, I’m not very optimistic we’ll have a team here in 2020.
by jthomas 3:32 PM

Will the OC have any fresh plays in the repertoire next Sunday or will we see the same stuff that they tried over and over vs. Minn?
by Tom 3:32 PM

He’s cooking some up was we speak.
by jthomas 3:33 PM

I think the 2 pt decision was a good call, given the wind in your face issue. The actual play chosen to be run sucked.
by Steve 3:33 PM

Greg Zuerlein has one of the strongest legs in the NFL.
by jthomas 3:34 PM

I’m afraid for Welker. He was a great player but he’s exposing himself to severe health problems for the rest of his life.
by Tom 3:34 PM

Yep, that’s the risk.
by jthomas 3:34 PM

Jim, With Welker signed, who is really the rams best receiver at this moment? Some seems to have either butterfingers or prone to fumble on big play. It’s hard to watch at times. 🙁
by Pang 3:34 PM

Yeah, it is. I really thought we’d see more out of Quick by now.
by jthomas 3:35 PM

At least the Rams finally have a 3rd down go to guy in Wes Welker. We don’t know what we are getting but we know what we have had. With Gurley, Tavon and Welker, someone should be able to pick up a 1st down.
by ramsfan 3:36 PM

Not sure how much Welker has left, or how quickly he’ll be able to contribute in this offense.
by jthomas 3:36 PM

Jim, as always, thanks for fielding questions. Regarding Brian Quick: I find it mind boggling that he gets 1 to 2 targets a game, and on those targets, seems to be streaking away from the ball in the other direction. For a team who desperately needs offensive help, why isn’t a guy who started to resemble a true #1 last year more integral at this point? Is it a mental thing, a coaching thing, a QB chemistry thing, a lingering injury thing?
by Ray K. 3:37 PM

I don’t think it’s an injury thing.
by jthomas 3:37 PM

Can Stan just decide to move the team even if the owners vote him down, ala, Al Davis? After living with the Big Red leaving, now the Rams, I may be done with NFL, maybe football altogether, the sport I’ve loved my entire life. I can’t handle a sport where the owners think so little of their fans to deal with them like this.
by HomerDave 3:39 PM

There’s always the danger that Stan can go rogue and basically dare the NFL to try and stop him.
by jthomas 3:39 PM

I’m not sure we should be counting our chickens too soon. Chicago can do the same kind of damage defensively that Minnesota did. And Baltimore is going to be very tough.
by Tom 3:40 PM

Agreed.
by jthomas 3:40 PM

So are you comfortable saying that the Brian Quick project has been scrapped?
Is his injured shoulder that messed up?
by joeboevercloever 3:40 PM

Don’t think the shoulder is an issue. And no, I’m not ready to say the “Quick project” should be scrapped.
by jthomas 3:41 PM

In my opinion, Sam showed stuff in Dallas that we will never see from Foles. Your thoughts please?
by Tom 3:42 PM

yes, at his best, Bradford is a better passer, a more accurate passer than Foles. I’ve said this all along.
by jthomas 3:43 PM

Ga. jim ..I believe its Stan holding the Offense back he cant move a playoff team your thoughts? In the 4qt the rams had the at there back an fisher played it safe instead of attacking….he fisher didnt even attempt a pass down field or didnt try to get closer where is the trust..or its just plain o’l Stan fault …
by roc 3:43 PM

It was very surprising to see that handoff at 3rd-and-11. Fisher is conservative offensively, there’s no doubt, but I thought they’d at least try to throw for a first down there.
by jthomas 3:44 PM

Jim, in your opinion is St. Louis an NFL city in 2016?
by John 3:44 PM

I’m still at 46-54 they stay.
by jthomas 3:45 PM

Wow! Eight games and Sam is still standing. Philly must have a great OL. Your take?
by LB 3:45 PM

No, Philly does not have a great O-line. and Bradford has taken some shots.
by jthomas 3:46 PM

OK, the master plan was, let Nick break in the newbies on the O-Line, and I come and save the day in 2017…..You re-sign me for how much JT?
by Sam Bradford 3:46 PM

Sam, again, I’m happy for your play against Dallas. But let some others ask some questions.
by jthomas 3:47 PM

good day Jim, so the Rams are 4-4, I guess we are who we thought we would be, mediocre at this point right?
by ekern55 3:47 PM

In my game-by-game predictions that we ran as part of our Rams preview section, I had them at 4-4 at this point. And just about everything has gone as expected, except I had them losing at Arizona and winning at Washington.
by jthomas 3:48 PM

One thing I found funny was Fisher expressing how great of a loss Stedman Bailey will be on offense. Now, he is great special teams player, but offense? Do you think the rams should’ve made a move to sign a WR even if Bailey didn’t get suspended?
by Cole 3:48 PM

Again, I didn’t think Fisher was over-the-top with his Bailey remarks. Losing Bailey is a loss for the team, but Fisher didn’t make it sound like they need to replace Jerry Rice for a month. As for making a move, there usually isn’t much out there this time of the year.
by jthomas 3:50 PM

Jim, watching the coach’s film on Andrew Donnal was rough. Surprised Rhaney didn’t get a shot at LG?
by Tyle 3:50 PM

That is an interesting point. Rhaney did seem close to earning a starting job at the end of preseason.
by jthomas 3:51 PM

I understand coach Zimmer was upset after the game but if he really felt sometype of way he should have approached Greg Williams and let his feelings be known. You think?
by Dwayne 3:52 PM

Or Fisher.
by jthomas 3:52 PM

Hello Jim. I remember the very first question I ask you in this chat room many, many years ago. “Jim, do you think the Rams might be interested in Jay Cutler?” At the time, Marc Bulger was having his issues at QB. I remember your response very well. You proceeded to go on a tirade about why would the Rams be interested in a QB with a high interception rate. My thinking was, did I get this guy on a bad day? But I have come to enjoy your articles on the PD and I follow you on Twitter. So now my question today is, how long will the Rams go with Nick Foles?
by BoPat from SoCal 3:53 PM

Sorry if I hurt your feelings. Do you still think Cutler is the answer? As for Foles, I cant seem them making a change this season.
by jthomas 3:54 PM

Hi, Jim. Why don’t the Rams utilize me more in their passing attack? It’s crazy–it’s week 10 and look at how verdant and green I still am!
by Middle of the Field 3:55 PM

Maybe with a little pick-play action on crossing routes?
by jthomas 3:55 PM

Hi Jim! I think the offensive troubles lie more with our Coordinator(and dropped passes) than Foles. It seems they use that jet sweep hand off constantly now and while it gets yardage to me it feels like they are leaning on it far too much.
by TBaker 3:56 PM

It was about the only thing that was working consistently in Minnesota.
by jthomas 3:56 PM

I missed Coach Fisher’s explanation on why he went for two in the first quarter. Could you please relate his reasoning?
by Ramdog28 3:56 PM

It was part strategic and part weather-related. Fisher felt the Rams needed to maximum all scoring opportunities and he was wary of the wind. Sound convincing to you?
by jthomas 3:57 PM

The more I thought about it, the more outraged I was by Zimmer’s accusations of dirty play from the Rams. How do you feel?
by Tom 3:58 PM

I thought it was a little over the top.
by jthomas 3:58 PM

It is pretty obvious that the Rams to LA is a done deal. Why not have the owners vote tomorrow and get it done?
by LB 3:59 PM

Given up, have we?
by jthomas 3:59 PM

Based on past events I won’t be surprised if the Rams cut Stedman Bailey and trade a draft pick to Baltimore for Chris Givens during the off season.
by joeboevercloever 3:59 PM

Kind of a Case Keenum-type deal?
by jthomas 4:00 PM

Does mannion dress on game day?
by Boon 4:01 PM

No, he’s bee the third QB, a pregame inactive all season.
by jthomas 4:01 PM

Have you ever covered a sport other than football?
by Boon 4:01 PM

Sure. when I was the Mizzou beat writer I covered college basketball, including several Final Fours. And way back when, when I covered high school sports, I covered everything.
by jthomas 4:03 PM

Should the Rams emphasize offensive players (Free-Agency and Draft) during 2016 off-season?
by CaliSteve 4:03 PM

Again, it depends what happens with all the Rams’ pending free agents.
by jthomas 4:05 PM

Wow, couldn’t believe we still have people asking for Johnny Football. A bust in every way and still has trolls, like Tebow mania. Liked you “No” answer.
by Don 4:06 PM

Thanks.
by jthomas 4:06 PM

You had a better time and more things happening at old Mizzou than Matter has.
by Don 4:06 PM

The Mizzou beat has always been a very tough beat to cover. That hasn’t changed.
by jthomas 4:06 PM

Will Quinn and McDonald be back this week?
by MG 4:07 PM

Fisher said he expects them back.
by jthomas 4:07 PM

Ethan Westbrook – is he starter material next year if we don’t sign somebody back?
by Uncle Leo 4:08 PM

I think he’s got starter’s potential, but don’t know if he’s there yet.
by jthomas 4:08 PM

Right now, who’s our best starting OL?
by Tom 4:09 PM

Right now, it might be Garrett Reynold or Greg Robinson. I might’ve said Tim Barnes before Sunday.
by jthomas 4:10 PM

Rams Head Coach Jeff Fisher –– 11/6/15

(On what he sees from Vikings QB Teddy Bridgewater on tape)
“I remember some comments early last year from (Vikings Head Coach) Mike (Zimmer) and then from (Vikings Offensive Coordinator) Norv Turner about Teddy. They just said that he’s got all the talent in the world. You can see it. The ball’s coming out. He’s reading. He’s making good decisions. They’re doing a great job with him. So, it’s the primary reason that they’re 5-2. They’ve got a good football team, but Teddy’s playing the position very well right now.”

(On if he thinks it seems like Bridgewater does not panic in the pocket)
“He does not. No, he’s got mobility where he can extend plays with his legs. They use him outside the edge. But, he makes really quick decisions, which is good. I mean, he’s patient. He takes check downs. He knows where to go when it’s time to go outside. He goes outside and he goes out there quickly. He effortlessly throws very accurate. I mean, that’s the thing that’s impressive. You watch him on tape, the ball’s right where it should be. So, they have a good one there.”

(On how he sells this game to his team as it just being another game)
“It’s a road game and it’s the next game. It’s a very well-coached opponent. So, we have to go and play well.”

(On if he has any concern that the players may be a little too excited at the start of the game)
“No. No, we’re on the road. I mean, last time we played well on the road was in the second half of Arizona. So, we have to find a way to just play consistently for four quarters. But, I’m not concerned about their mindset, their mentality and whether they’re too excited to start the game or flat to start the game. We’re never going to be there. We’re just going to play. We have to play.”

(On what he saw out of TE Jared Cook last weekend and what he expects out of him every week)
“Yeah, Jared bounced back and he’s always going to do that. I’ve known him for a long time. The position’s hard. Sometimes balls come loose. Sometimes you don’t make the catches. But, he bounced back and made some really good catches for us. Each week, (QB) Nick (Foles) and Jared and (WR) Brian (Quick) and the rest of the guys are becoming more and more familiar with each other. So, you would hope that in a game like this, where they’re going to be geared and focused on stopping our run, that Jared would have some big plays.”

(On if he’s seeing a pretty significant gain in his offensive line right now as opposed to five weeks ago)
“It’s interesting. I went back and I looked at our opener last year against the Vikings. We have five new offensive linemen. So, we’re making progress. They’re young. They’re making progress. They’re working hard. They’re protecting the quarterback right now. They did a decent job last week. We didn’t give up any sacks. So, I just would expect them to get better. Now, (T) Rob (Havenstein) didn’t practice. He’ll be questionable for the game with an Achilles. If that’s the case, then we’ll just plug people in. We have young guys that know what to do. (Coach Paul) Bou’s (Boudreau) done a good job with them. We’ll just plug them in and go.”

(On his mentality on trying to make this an elite defense)
“Well, yeah, 12 points in two weeks is too much. Twenty-six points last week was not enough offensively. So, that’s just kind of the way we look at it. You have to just continue to emphasize to get better. I mean, you give up six points, you still have a chance to lose the game. So, you just have to be realistic. Again, yes, going into this week if you said we could hold them to six points, I’d take it. But, still it’s that defensive mindset that you have to instill. (Defensive Coordinator) Gregg (Williams) does a good job of it, but you can’t ever become satisfied.”

===

Rams Defensive Coordinator Gregg Williams – 11/6/15

(On how they can make Vikings RB Adrian Peterson have a quiet Sunday)
“There’s never any guarantees when you’re playing against a guy like that, future Hall of Famer, played against him a bunch. I have a lot of different defenses and the thing from a coaching standpoint is, you can be sound, you can be right and then he can still win. From an offensive standpoint, when they look at him, they can hand the ball to him and he’ll make unblocked defenders pay for it by running over them, running around them. We’ve got our work cut out for us. We did that, we were geared up for it last year. He did a really good job last year. We’re going to have to make sure that we’re accounting for him every single snap.”

(On what he sees from Vikings QB Teddy Bridgewater)
“Bright young quarterback. Really, he’s very well coached. I have tremendous respect for (Vikings Offensive Coordinator) Norv Turner. Back in the old Dallas Cowboy days, and me in the Houston Oiler days as we came up through the ranks in the NFL. So, I’ve known him for a long time and he does a very good job developing young talent at the quarterback position. I can see a lot of the things that Norv wants his guys to do, following coaching instructions. And then, he’s also adapted some of the things to Teddy that Teddy does well. He’s coached some of his own things in and allowed Teddy to have some say. He’s doing better and better and better. You can tell he’s a sharp kid in how he recognizes defensive things and how he is able to make changes at the line of scrimmage. A lot of young quarterbacks can’t do that. Especially somebody that’s as multiple as we are. He’s done very well with that and Norv has done a really good job.”

(On Bridgewater looking patient and poised)
“Very patient and poised, yeah. The thing is, the game unfolds…as the game moves along, he gets better. It shows you a guy that’s very confident in his abilities and he takes every play and measures himself, measures them every play. He wants to be able to have moving pieces and adapt to what you’re doing. He’s done very well. You look at his stats in the second half, you look at his stats in the fourth quarter, you look at his stats on third down, he’s done very well. We have our work cut out for us.”

(On if the defense is an elite defense)
“Again, it’s still early in the season for me to say that. When we get those kind of things, it’s kind of when the season is all over and done with. They’re doing very well. Again, what I’ve said from day one when you guys asked me that question is: when they take ownership, and they are, when they have say, and they do, it might be my say and it’s their idea but when they do the same thing that I’m thinking about, we have a chance to be really, really good. These guys, if we can stay healthy, we’ve got to keep all of our guys healthy, they have a chance to really do it. They have a chance to be very good. Again, we’re playing against some dominant offenses. We’re playing against some really good quarterbacks and some really good coaching staffs. We’ve got a lot to do yet and we’ve got a long ways to go. You know what I want to do is, is I want to be able to see this weekend, are they going to be the best defense this weekend? It’s each and every weekend. We can’t take any plays off. We can’t take any days off. How we go about doing it this week, we’ve had several nice weekends in a row. All of that is over and behind us now, we’ve got to go do it this weekend.”

(On his comfort level with S Maurice Alexander and how far he’s come)
“He’s come a long ways. I’ll tell you this and as you guys go and talk to him in the locker room and interview him, last year he couldn’t have a football discussion. And when I say this, and it’s not any knock on him, but here’s a kid that only played one year as a defensive back in college football. One year in his career from Pop Warner to now. Now he comes in the National Football League and has to play in the secondary. I mean, it was overwhelming. My personality is a little overwhelming. From the structure, discipline, accountability and trying to break his spirit on a couple of things and getting him to be more structured, more accountable, more focused and he’s done fabulous. He can have conversations now where I think I’m talking to one of his coaches or both of his coaches. So, he’s listening to his coaching and then he’s got athletic ability that belongs in this league. But, he has to make sure he understands the concepts of this league. And then he’s got to stay healthy and he has stayed healthy. Last year, he battled the health issue a little bit. So, when you miss practice, I tease those guys all of the time in the training room, I’m going to have to start having meetings with the trainers so that they can teach them and coach them because they have more time with them than I do. And that was one of the things last year, he was hurt quite a bit. Once he got on a roll and was able to play, (he did) very well. When you see a guy at his position play well in the special teams, he ought to be able to play defense, too. There’s more space that you’ve got to cover in special teams. There’s more athletic instinct of special teams than you have to do on an offensive or defensive play. He fits in very well to what we do and we’ve just got to keep on taking steps with him.”

(On how important it’s been to allow one of the fewest red zone opportunities in the league and hardly any touchdowns)
“Very, very important, and I’ll tell you this. Not to over simplify the game, but really the best communicators I’ve ever been around have been able to take something that people think are complex and make it simple. Defense in this league, defense at any level of football is, how well do you tackle and how many touchdowns do you allow. Then you want to play great in the red zone, be really good on third down, don’t let them get down there. Have fewer opportunities to have to defend the end zone. Have fewer opportunities to have to defend the goal line. We’re doing decent in that area. We’re going to have to continue to step up. Continue to kind of turn people away in that area and we need to do a good job on taking the ball away down there. That’s our next step.”

(On if he’s surprised at how well S Mark Barron has done)
“I really am not. When I tell you this, I’m not trying to act like I know everything, because I don’t. But, I loved the kid coming out. When we were scouting him and when he was coming out of the draft, I’m thinking, ‘Wow.’ This is a perfect kind of guy that I have had before in so many other stops. I shouldn’t say like him before, because he might be better than some of those other guys at stops. I’ve always had a three-safety package. I’ve always had a package of where we play a safety like a linebacker, but also have to play him like a safety and sometimes like a corner. One of the things that quickly comes to my mind, take a look at Roman Harper. Everybody was down on him when I went to the Saints and all of the sudden, he goes to two or three straight Pro Bowls and got nine sacks, or eight or nine sacks, a season and he is outstanding down around the box. Pierson Prioleau, Blaine Bishop, a lot of different guys along the stops, I thought, ‘Wow, this kid could be good.’ And when we got him here, he’s done exactly what we’ve asked him to do, what we expected him to do.”

Todd Gurley shows St. Louis Rams he was worthy of No. 10 pick

Sam Farmer

http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-rams-gurley-farmer-20151030-column.html

Les Snead naturally felt badly for Todd Gurley after the Georgia running back suffered a season-ending knee injury last fall.

But Snead, general manager of the St. Louis Rams, also was tormented by the thought that Gurley would wind up with an NFC West rival. At the time, it seemed unlikely that the Rams would take him with the No. 10 pick.

When Gurley postponed medical evaluations at the scouting combine in February, Snead thought: He’s going to slide to the bottom of the first round and be drafted 31st by the Seattle Seahawks.

The outlook started looking better for Gurley, prompting Snead to wonder: Will the Arizona Cardinals take him at 24?

Time passed, and Gurley continued to heal. Snead thought: Uh oh, the San Francisco 49ers are going to take him at 17.

The Rams, meanwhile, sat mum. Most experts had them taking an offensive lineman.

“You knew there were a few teams wanting running backs,” said Snead, easing back into his office chair at Rams headquarters this week. “What I didn’t want to occur at all was somebody getting any hint that we were going to take him, with the whole selfish motive of, ‘Hey, the Rams are going to take him at 10. Let’s jump to nine or eight and get him first.'”

Snead’s concern: He didn’t want the Rams trying to tackle Gurley for the next decade.

Gurley chuckled this week when he heard the back story.

“That’s pretty cool, man,” he said, standing in a hallway outside the locker room at team headquarters. “I definitely was excited when they took me at No. 10. I was kind of shocked. They really kept it quiet. I know when they do those visits to do background checks back home, one of my high school coaches was like, ‘Yeah, the Rams came by,’ and I’m like, ‘They’re not going to take me.’ But they did. It was crazy.”

The Rams got their hands on Gurley, and now everyone else in the NFL is trying to do the same. He has been an indisputable phenom so far. After sitting out the exhibition season and the first two regular-season games as he continued to rehabilitate his knee, Gurley knocked off the rust with six carries against the Pittsburgh Steelers and in the last three games ran for 146, 159 and 128 yards.

The soft-spoken kid, who has struck a friendship with Rams Hall of Fame running back Eric Dickerson, is the first NFL rookie since 2005 to rush for at least 125 yards in each of his first three starts, matching the feat of former Tampa Bay Buccaneers back Cadillac Williams.

The St. Louis fans were so loud in chanting Gurley’s name during last Sunday’s game against the Cleveland Browns that Rams Coach Jeff Fisher had to flap his arms to hush them so his offense could hear the quarterback.

“I would’ve liked to have been around to listen to the ‘Eric’ chant as well, the Eric Dickerson chant,” Fisher said afterward.

Matter of fact, the first person Gurley heard from after the game was Dickerson, who called a Rams executive and had him hand the phone to the rookie sensation in the locker room.

“I like his acceleration, I like his first step, and when I saw him in college I said, ‘This kid can play,'” said Dickerson, who as a member of the Los Angeles Rams set still-standing NFL records for rushing yards by a rookie with 1,808 in 1983 and for a single season with 2,105 in 1984.

“He’s big, he’s fast, and he doesn’t hesitate,” Dickerson said of the 6-foot-1, 227-pound Gurley. “Guys who dance around, those aren’t the guys who make it. The guys who make the quick decision and just hit it, those are the guys who do it. And he’s that kind of guy. When he sees a hole, he don’t mess around.”

Dickerson and Gurley met when the Rams trained with the Dallas Cowboys last summer in Oxnard. where Fisher paid homage to the 55-year-old NFL icon — who still looks like he could play — by putting him in the huddle for a play during a non-contact walk-through drill. Just before doing so, Fisher informed his offensive linemen that they were going to have the honor of blocking for the great Eric Dickerson — perhaps a hint of things to come when Gurley got well.

“Even when I played I knew that one day my day would come when this would all be over,” Dickerson said. “For Jeff to let me run that last play in practice — that’s all I did because it’s all I can do any more — that was a thrill for me. I wrote him a note on a picture and said, ‘Thanks for letting me carry the rock one last time.'”

Gurley was watching at the time, just as Dickerson is watching him now. While acknowledging the long-time contribution of running back Steven Jackson, who wore No. 39, the Rams point out that Hall of Famer Marshall Faulk wore No. 28, Dickerson No. 29 and Gurley No. 30. A natural progression.

Gurley leads the NFL with 213 yards in the fourth quarter and is the only player with three runs of at least 45 yards, one in each of the last three games. Last Sunday, Gurley gained an astounding 97 yards after contact. He runs through arm tackles as if they’re turnstiles.

“If you just watch his highlights, I don’t know if you truly appreciate the tough yards that he gets as well,” Rams linebacker James Laurinaitis said. “Being able to see him in person, the thing that stood out to me when he first got here is just how explosive he is. His patience, his vision, and just how he knows when to take off.”

The patience is what’s especially impressive to Snead, who has a laptop on his desk that’s connected to a large video screen in the corner of his office. He can pull up any play from any game or practice with a few clicks, then dissect it in frame-by-frame detail.

Although Dickerson talked about how Gurley doesn’t dance and just hits a hole, Snead is able to show how the young back patiently waits for a crease to develop — as opposed to simply trying to run over defenders — before making his move. It all happens in an instant, almost too quick for a cognitive process.

Gurley had to exercise the same patience during his healing process. The Rams considered unveiling him for their Week 2 game against the Washington Redskins, but Gurley told Fisher toward the end of the week that he wasn’t quite ready to go. That wasn’t easy for a rookie champing at the bit to prove himself.

The pivotal play, the one Gurley needed to experience, came in practice the next week. Snead dialed it up on his laptop for review. The Rams were in shorts but with shoulder pads and helmets. The backup center was in, and he was knocked back about four yards by a defensive tackle, causing him to collide with Gurley coming out of the backfield. It was a huge body launched squarely into Gurley’s surgically repaired knee.

The footage is silent, but you can almost hear the Rams gasp as Gurley’s legs are swept from under him and he is upended.

In a blink, the rookie popped to his feet and ran 25 yards downfield.

“Coach,” he said as he returned to the huddle, “I’m ready to go.”

RamView, October 25, 2015
Game #6: Rams 24, Browns 6

The game didn’t start out that way, but the Rams came away with a dominating win over Cleveland, riding their defense, Todd Gurley and some way-overdue offensive adjustments. It’s been a struggle, but after six weeks, I daresay the arrow is now pointing upward in Rams Nation.

Position by position:
* RB: The Rams had two games with a 100-yard rusher last season. In three weeks as a starter this year, Todd Gurley (19-128) is already up to three. He was the only good thing about the Ram offense in the 1st half, including a 14-yard toss left where he hurdled a diving tackler. He helped get the Rams in scoring position with a 15-yard run in the 2nd, and got them in what Jeff Fisher considers FG range at the end of the half by breaking an ankle tackle and powering for 12, then tearing off for 23 on a perfectly-set-up screen pass. Gurley got the Rams closer again in the 3rd on a run you’d never have seen coming at the snap. But he squeezed through a hole that wasn’t really there, slipped two tackles, broke into the open, and crossing left to right, used an insane block by Austin to go up the sideline for 48. Naturally, the Rams scored on NONE of those drives, so Gurley took on that job, too. His first career TD was a 1-yard breeze thanks to Cory Harkey’s big block. Cleveland hung within two scores late until Gurley slapped them down with his 2nd TD run to make it 24-6. From the 16, he cut back a sweep right, used good outside blocking, including another fine block by Austin, broke a tackle at the 5 and two more at the 2, forcing his way into the end zone with the home crowd chanting his name. If Gurley had been carrying a mic there, he could have dropped it. Todd Gurley has been every bit as good as advertised, the total package. Speed and power. Vision and football IQ. Agility and quickness. Running, and this week, receiving (4-35), making him an even more dangerous and more complete player. He even played without his knee brace this week, which is great for those of us who enjoy forcing symbolism into football recaps. Ain’t nothing holding Todd Gurley back now.

* QB: Nick Foles (15-23-163, PR 86.0) avoided the awful turnovers this week and managed the Rams to victory despite a first half to forget. The Rams had THREE total yards of offense in the first quarter. Foles had 64 yards passing at halftime, with one downfield completion, and that was fumbled away by Jared Cook. Foles wasn’t pressured as much as he was in Green Bay but seemed to have visions of Clay Matthews dancing in his head at times. There probably wouldn’t have been an open receiver anyway, but several of Foles’ dumpoffs or throwaways came out really quickly, before the rush was really on him. The Rams benefited from increasing the offensive tempo after halftime. They drove 70+ yards inside the Browns 10 and didn’t score, but went 88 yards the next drive, most of it on Foles’ arm, to finally score an offensive TD. He hit Tavon Austin on the sideline for 20, went deep for Kenny Britt, who drew a 26-yard DPI, and followed that with another bomb for Britt, for 41 down to the 1. That drive was really the game for Foles, whose strengths otherwise were throwing screen passes and handing off to Gurley. But Foles did his job this week. He ran the offense without any major screw-ups while also contributing a key play or two. This kind of game will never get Nick Foles to the Pro Bowl, but it’ll get him an A grade from Jeff Fisher.

* Receivers: Kenny Britt (1-41) dropped the opening pass of the game and disappeared, but defying recent Ram WR form, actually became relevant for an important sequence later in the game. Beating Pierre Desir on back-to-back plays in the 3rd, Britt drew a 26-yard penalty, then beat him by a step deep downfield on a go route down to the 1 to set up the Rams’ first offensive TD. Brian Quick (0-0) made a brilliant catch of a sideline bomb in the 2nd, but, typical Brian Quick field awareness, it wouldn’t have counted because he stepped out of bounds a couple of steps earlier. More classic Quick in the 4th, as he ran the wrong route and left Foles holding the bag to get creamed for a sack. I hope the Rams do a far better job drafting The Next Terrell Owens when they replace Quick after this season. Tavon Austin (4-43) was effective on screens and added a 21-yard end-around, but he was lethal as… a blocker? Yes, the diminutive Austin basically blocked two guys out of the play on Gurley’s 48-yard run, and had another impressive block on Gurley’s 2nd TD run. He had the only catch by a WR in the first half, so by no means did this group have a great game. But in the end, they found ways to make or contribute to big plays. That counts for something.

* Tight ends: Jared Cook (2-19) is doing the Rams more harm than good at this point. They had something going in the 2nd, with Foles hitting Cook for 17 on a crossing route into the red zone. Typical clutch Cook, though, he had the ball in the wrong arm and fumbled after getting hit from behind by Donte Whitner. With Lance Kendricks (hand) inactive, it looked like a long day was coming at blocking TE when Gurley got stuffed on his first carry, with Justice Cunningham unable to budge Paul Kruger and Cory Harkey whiffing on the edge. Harkey was pretty reliable, though, leading some good runs and landing a massive block on the edge to make Gurley’s first TD run a walk in the park. Without those blocks, though, the TE group would have contributed nothing this week and are still a black hole in the Ram offense.

* Offensive line: Blocking was a struggle again early, but the o-line fought out of it behind season-best performances by Greg Robinson and Tim Barnes. Robinson was excellent getting out on sweeps and screens and made several good blocks out there. He also looked solid in pass pro, though the price of two holds and a false start was a little steep. Robinson helped spring Gurley on a 15-yard run in the 2nd, but that was really made by Barnes’ outstanding pull block. Barnes excelled at the end of the half, springing Gurley for 12 and then throwing a great kickout block to spring a 23-yard screen, led out by Garrett Reynolds at LG. Which leads me to this week’s weak link, Jamon Brown, who was flipped to RG in the wake of Rodger Saffold’s season-ending shoulder injury (surprise!) even though he and Reynolds were fine in the Green Bay game at the other guard spots. On cue, Brown struggled at his new position with Randy Starks. Starks beat him with a spin move on the opening 3rd down to land a big hit on Foles. Next drive, Gurley loses 3 on a sweep with Starks running Brown over. Inside the 10 in the 3rd, Starks beat Brown badly on a pass rush with a pretty simple rip move, and Brown didn’t make things any better by inexplicably shoving Starks right on top of Foles for a big sack, and the Rams went from a realistic TD opportunity to a missed FG. Brown and Justice did have nice blocks on Gurley’s 2nd TD run, and despite the early blown-up runs and hits on Foles, the line did probably its best work of the season (admittedly a low hurdle to clear). Foles had solid pockets on the long balls to Britt. He wasn’t hit anything like he was in Green Bay, only sacked twice, and the second was Quick’s fault much more than the line’s. Even many of the running game breakdowns were on TEs as much as linemen. Gurley does a lot that makes a line look good, and Foles does some, too, but their performance this week gives hope that things are at least trending in the right direction up front.

* Secondary: Leading from behind isn’t just American foreign policy these days; it’s how the Rams are winning games with defense. Janoris Jenkins got the party started very early, drilling Taylor Gabriel on a smoke route to blast loose a fumble that bounced perfectly to Rodney McLeod for a short scoop-and-score. Trumaine Johnson seemed to draw the most coverage of Travis Benjamin (4-47) and did not fare badly at all. TruJo was also terrific in run support and closing down short passes and McCown scrambles. Cleveland got off to a hot start out of halftime with two big gains, but TruJo slowed them down by tripping Robert Turbin up in the backfield, stalling them out to settle for a 2nd FG. Cleveland’s biggest gains came against soft zones, but McCown was frequently forced to hold the ball and/or scramble because of downfield coverage. Jenkins broke up a couple of passes. The safeties hit anything that moved. T.J. McDonald struggled on Cleveland’s first FG drive, getting deked badly on a McCown scramble and missing a couple of other tackles. He got sweet revenge in the 4th, though, about twisting Benjamin in half to force one of the four fumbles the Rams took away. Both the Rams’ sacks were really coverage sacks. Hayes had plenty of time to get to McCown for a sack/fumble in the 1st, and when Westbrooks mauled McCown in the 3rd, the QB had to eat the ball because the DBs had done great work to jump the planned screen pass. Preseason gave us high hopes of a big season in the secondary in 2015, and right now, they are delivering.

* Defensive line: The Ram defense impressed this week by forcing four fumbles, impressed by sacking Josh McCown (26-32-270, 39.4 PR) four times and eventually driving him out of the game, impressed by giving up only 82 rushing yards and especially impressed with their depth. Will Hayes started off a long day for McCown by getting him from behind for a sack and fumble, recovered by Akeem Ayers. Cleveland drove inside the Ram 10 early in the 2nd, but not without McCown facing pressure from all angles, whether from Hayes, Ethan Westbrooks, or Robert Quinn, who trucked Joe Thomas on 3rd down to flush McCown out of bounds and force a FG. Eugene Sims nearly got a safety as the next drive 3-and-outed, and on the one after that, with the Cleveland line flinching like overcaffeinated cats in a room full of laser pointers, Hayes and Aaron Donald flushed McCown on 3rd-and-long for another 3-and-out. Vintage Donald closed out Cleveland’s last drive of the half. He shot the gap before Alex Mack could even turn to block him, nearly beat Johnson to the handoff and dropped him for minus-5. The Rams were hard to block this week without committing penalties, which Cleveland found out the hard way in the 3rd. Donald drew a hold, and Quinn drew one from Thomas a few plays later to take away a long completion. Westbrooks played with plenty of fire and ended the 3rd by shedding the RT and sacking McCown for a big loss. Nick Fairley nearly spoiled the party in the 4th with a roughing-the-passer penalty, but the next play, the big man scrambled 20 yards downfield to scoop up a McDonald-forced fumble (humorously returning it 5 yards in the wrong direction.) Gregg Williams’ use of 3-man lines has reduced Michael Brockers’ snaps but seemingly made him more effective. He stuffed 3 runs and broke out a swim move and nearly sacked Johnny Manziel, who replaced a battered McCown at the end of the game. Everybody on defense made a play this week. (Just about everybody jumped offside this week, too, the Rams did it FIVE times.) They’ve sure reacted to losing Chris Long to injury a lot better than they did last year.

* Linebackers: The Rams swarmed the Browns like hornets at times. After the McLeod TD, Akeem Ayers blew up a handoff that resulted in a 3-yard loss, and Mark Barron blew up a pitchback to Duke Johnson for another loss. Ayers blitzed over center the next play and wound up recovering a McCown fumble. Ayers was much more active against the run than I recall from previous weeks. Barron had a very physical 4th quarter. He helped McDonald twist Benjamin to force a fumble. He also really jacked McCown on a first-down throw after the Rams’ last TD. It looked clean and McCown eventually had to come out of the game. Gregg Williams must whistle happy tunes on his nightly drive home having hitters like Barron and McDonald around. I’m not sure why Barron’s ever been considered a safety by the NFL, though. With 16 (!) tackles this week, he seems to be a born LB, while he’s never really seemed born for pass coverage. Johnson (7-73) fooled him pretty badly on a 10-yard leakout in the 2nd, getting him to drop off a mile by faking an upfield pattern. 2nd-and-20 in the 3rd, Barron let Gary Barnidge (6-101) sneak behind him for 32 on a nifty self-tip catch. Those two should be pretty well-known weapons to opponents, and the Rams could have accounted for them better. James Laurinaitis seemed quiet, but he stopped several runs and made a key play to end the 3rd by closing on Johnson to stop him short on 3rd-and-13. Like the front four, the linebackers have stepped it up with a key player sidelined.

* Special teams: At nearly 49 yards a kick, Johnny Hekker had a Pro Bowl-quality game. He pinned Cleveland inside the 10 twice (they pinned themselves another time with an illegal block), and the Rams consistently winning the field position battle was a hidden key to victory. It wasn’t always pretty. Hekker had one that flew maybe 30 yards, but rolled 20, and Bradley Marquez downed it at the 4. Other times, it was, like Hekker’s perfect and unreturnable 53-yarder at the sideline that denied Cleveland good field position after a Rams 3-and-out in the 4th. Greg Zuerlein’s got me on pins and needles again, though. His second crack at a 63-yard FG in two games started wide right and never had a chance. When he biffed a 35-yard attempt in the 3rd in similar fashion, it became hard not to wonder if the ridiculously long attempts are screwing up his technique on the kicks that should be automatic. The Rams nearly botched the opening kickoff. Benny Cunningham handed off to Stedman Bailey, who Cleveland had dead to rights at the 10, but they blew the tackle and Bailey got out across the 30. Never a dull day on special teams.

* Strategery: With the Ram offense playing the first half impossibly even crappier than they did in Green Bay, it was natural to wonder if Frank Cignetti had spent the break watching Star Wars trailers instead of game-planning. The Force was with the Rams in the 2nd half, though. They immediately had their best two drives of the game after going to no-huddle. That could have been inspired by their 2:00 offense before halftime. Not that he should forget, but Cignetti remembered the Rams still had Austin and got him involved with screens, sweeps and decoys. Cignetti should also know by now that he’s going to have to scheme his receivers open for them to actually get open this season, which worked with trips formations in the 2nd half. Good move to get Gurley involved as a receiver, and Foles had checkdown options this week that he didn’t appear to have when he got into trouble at Lambeau. I don’t know why more of this wasn’t done in the first half while the Rams set offensive football back 100 years, or how much of it is still due to protection problems. Cignetti’s offense has been blowing up on the launch pad for 2-3 games now, but he’s been able to tweak it during games with some success. Next week, let’s try not blowing up first. Gregg Williams didn’t break any new ground this week, but his blitzes paid off a lot more often than not. Blitzes produced Hayes’ sack/fumble, forced a 3-and-out with the Browns backed up at their goal line in the 2nd, forced their 2nd FG attempt in the 3rd and forced McCown out of the game after Barron’s big hit in the 4th. Williams also bedeviled McCown with secondary rotations, and the Rams looked well-prepared for Cleveland’s screen game. Williams has been dialed in just about every game this season, and the Ram defense is reaping the benefits.

* Upon further review: Cleveland fans probably disagree, but it looked from here like Pete Morelli called a decent game. They weren’t afraid to make game-changing calls, like the hold on Joe Thomas that canceled a completed bomb to Benjamin in the 3rd. Thomas ripped Quinn down by the collar, though, and it was just bad TV commentary that made the call look late. Earlier that drive, though, Barnidge got called for a hold of Westbrooks that was minute at best. I thought the big hit on McCown by Barron in the 4th was to the collarbone and the no-call was correct. It sure wasn’t a late hit; Foles has taken plenty this year a lot like it. McCown got facemasked, badly, after his fumble in the 4th, and not to pick on the lady ref, but Sarah Thomas’ defensive holding call that kept the Rams’ final TD drive alive was just terrible. Austin wasn’t grabbed and she never could have seen it had he been. Then again, Austin had an LB grabbing and leaning all over him on 3rd-and-3 before halftime without a call. I wasn’t a big fan of the stiffarm facemask call on Bailey, but most of the other million penalties called seemed good. Grade: B-minus

* Cheers: The Dome looked far from full in the few crowd shots CBS took, but, still, excellent job, Rams fans. The crowd came through loud and clear on TV, and it’s fair to credit them for several false starts. They let Cook have it after his fumble, too, deservedly. From the TV booth, Adam Archuleta was like I’d be in the stands; he’d mistake a play that was just a good pass rush as a blitz or say a rusher came in unblocked when he’d really beaten a block. He had good insight into coverage and downfield blocking. Brian Anderson claimed the holding flag that took back the bomb to Benjamin in the 3rd came late, when in fact, he just hadn’t seen it when it came out. They weren’t terrible but kind of showed why they’re a “C” team. Kudos to McCown, btw, for probably getting himself injured dodging a Rams cheerleader in the 2nd. He missed her, but not the stadium wall. He banged into it with his right elbow and that appeared to bother him the rest of the game. I salute his gallantry, but for Cleveland fans, sadly, no good deed goes unpunished.

* Who’s next?: This past offseason for the 49ers has to rank among the most tumultuous in NFL history. Head coach Jim Harbaugh was dismissed. They lost or let go 12 Pro Bowls worth of leadership on defense (Justin Smith and Patrick Willis), their best pass rusher (Aldon Smith), a future Pro Bowl LB (Chris Borland), both starting CBs, franchise rushing record-holder Frank Gore, three starting offensive linemen, heck, even 3-time Pro Bowl punter Andy Lee. They’ve gone from the Super Bowl in February 2013 to utter rebuilding mode, and judging from their 2-5 start this season, the survivors are the unlucky ones.

So the 49ers have a lot of problems all coming to roost at once, the biggest being they just can’t take over the LOS on either side of the ball like they’re used to. They really have no business running any direction but left behind Joe Staley and Alex Boone. RT Erik Pears is a major weak link; Michael Bennett beat him repeatedly Thursday night. The previous game, the Giants were putting him on his butt in the running game. They had one play against Seattle where a lineman was pulling at Kam Chancellor with a full head of steam and Chancellor won the collision. Decisively. They’re going with a practice squad guy at RG and C Marcus Martin needs seasoning and is routinely outmuscled. Every Ram TE, including Jared Cook, would be the 49ers’ best blocking TE (as long as I can count bruiser Bruce Miller as a fullback). Their offense is still predicated on beating defenses up and they just can’t do it. RB Carlos Hyde is physical and can bang out yards on his own, true, but he’s also been battling a foot injury and has been putting balls on the ground lately. He can get outside, but usually because he gets impatient waiting for an inside run to develop. The 49er passing game lacks both tactical vision and decent receivers. They’re trying to keep Colin Kaepernick from becoming another RGIII by making him mainly a pocket passer. He’s been effective lined up under center, where they can at least pose the threat of play-action. But they also tend not to trust him to throw much besides screens or anything farther than ten yards downfield, and his accuracy isn’t the greatest on those. (His five-INT, two-pick-six fiasco in Arizona had to create major lack of trust.) 95-year-old Anquan Boldin is still Kaepernick’s main target, with twice the receptions of any of his teammates, and Seattle showed you can cover him with a linebacker. They signed Torrey Smith as a free agent and should be taking multiple deep shots a game with him to extend defenses. I saw none in the two games I watched. The best they can do to spread the field is screens to their slot-type receivers. It’s Shurmurball, but actually without even the threat of play action, because Kaepernick usually ends up doing everything out of shotgun to attempt to make up for bad pass protection and receivers who can’t get open. If the 49ers don’t do more to open things up – move Kaepernick in the pocket, take some deep shots, use play-action credibly – they’re liable to come to St. Louis and look like what they are, the worst offense in the NFL. If the Rams stop Hyde on the ground early and can keep Kaepernick in the pocket without Alec Ogletree, San Francisco’s likely to stay in their offensive cocoon and the Rams could be more than halfway home.

With Aldon Smith having trainwrecked his way across the bay to Oakland, the 49ers’ only real pass-rushing threat is 2nd-year OLB Aaron Lynch (5 sacks). Be sloppy in your balance and footwork like Seattle’s RT was Thursday night, and Lynch will make you pay with his speed. Erik Flowers was much more technically sound the previous week, and Lynch didn’t show the complementary power to his speed game needed to beat him. If Rob Havenstein’s footwork is good and he can defend Lynch’s deadly inside move, pass protection should be OK. The 49ers don’t get a lot of push up the middle. Their main mission against the Rams will be to stop the run anyway, which makes OLB Ahmad Brooks an x-factor. He has 3 sacks and is typically among the league’s best run defenders, but he’s been affected by injuries and off-field problems. The Niners may change their approach for the run-heavy, no deep-threat Rams, but even against Seattle they relied on soft zone coverages and double-deep safeties, basically inviting the run to guard against the deep play, and with their best DB Antoine Bethea (pectoral) now out for the season, that’s another shell they seem likelier to stay in. They’ll blitz a little, but it hasn’t really been effective. ILB Michael Wilhoite collects a lot of tackles but doesn’t look fast enough to be a big blitz factor. And we might as well include 2013 NaVorro Bowman on the list of players the 49ers have lost. He’s back but has lost at least a step from that devastating knee injury in the 2013 NFC Championship. The Rams are picking the right time to get their backs active as receivers. They can exploit the 49ers there if not with their TEs.

The whole 49er franchise has lost a step, and then some, over the past couple of seasons. They’re as ripe for the picking as they have been since St. Louis got involved in this long-heated rivalry. The Rams are just 9-11 in St. Louis against the 49ers and this could be their last shot at them here. In my eyes, it’s a key game of this season and in the team’s history here. May Jeff Fisher and company treat it as such.

— Mike
Game stats from espn.com

Rams notes: Team reunites rookie offensive linemen

Joe Lyons

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/rams-notes-team-reunites-rookie-offensive-linemen/article_b69e4772-0d5e-561b-9304-d0382fd697c8.html

Rams rookie guard Jamon Brown, a third-round draft pick from Louisville, spent most of training camp on the right side and then started the first five games of the regular season at left guard.

Now, with veteran Garrett Reynolds stepping in to take the place of Rodger Saffold, who’s done for the season with a shoulder injury, Brown appears to be moving back to the right side.

“It’s not too bad,” the 22-year-old said following Wednesday’s practice at Rams Park. “I take it all the way back to college, where I played both sides, left and right tackle. Here, it’s pretty much the same. Now it’s just a matter of mastering the technique on the right side.

“The left side, you’re used to a certain play being on the front side and now, on the same play, you’re on the back side. It can get confusing at times, but I feel like I do a pretty good job with it.”

In the end, Brown said, it’s the coaches’ decision.

“Whether he wants me to play on the left or the right, it doesn’t matter,” the 6-foot-4, 323-pound Brown said. “I have a job to do and I’m going to do it on either side.”

With fellow rookie Todd Gurley leading the way, the Rams ran for 164 yards in a 24-22 win in Arizona and followed up with 191 rushing yards in a 24-10 loss at Green Bay. Brown feels that’s a sign of things to come for the Rams and their youthful offensive line.

On Sunday, Gurley and the Rams will face Cleveland and a rushing defense that has allowed a league-worst 149.8 yards per game on the ground.

“I’m very confident in our line,’ he said. “I think we’ve progressed a lot, coming from OTA’s into training camp and now into the season. I think we’ve made huge strides and we will continue to get better week in and week out.

“Obviously, there are still things we can do better and we’re constantly trying to work on those things.”

Brown is excited to be working alongside of second-round draft pick Rob Havenstein, but …

“It doesn’t skip a beat because I’ve worked with everybody in our room,” he said. “I just have to make sure I do my job and I’m sure everybody else will do theirs. We gotta continue to do what we do. It’s not really about their defense, it’s about us. And as long as we keep that mindset, we’re going to be fine.”

ALEXANDER IS BACK

Maurice Alexander, a reserve safety and special teams player, is back at practice after missing two games with a groin injury. He was hurt early in the Pittsburgh game on Sept. 27.“I’m feeling good, nice to be 100 (percent) again,” the second-year pro from Eureka High said. “When I first got hurt, I was hoping to get back quicker but the docs and trainers — they obviously know more than I do — they told me it’d be even longer than it’s been.“It was definitely frustrating because I felt good and felt faster than ever. An injury like that, you really have to be patient because if you push it too much, try to come back too soon, there’s always a chance you can re-injure it and be out even longer.

“But I’m back to where I was before and I’m looking forward to getting out there again on Sunday.”

RAMS IN THE COMMUNITY

The Rams will take part in a pair of charity events:

• Two-time Pro Bowl punter Johnny Hekker will punt off the roof of SSM Health St. Clare Hospital in Fenton Thursday at 9 a.m. as part of the SSM Kick Cancer Rooftacular. Hekker, kicker Greg Zuerlein and long snapper Jake McQuaide are co-chairs of the fund-raising program, which supports the needs of cancer patients throughout the community.

• In partnership with the United Way of Greater St. Louis, Rams players Benny Cunningham, Bradley Marquez, Marcus Roberson and Doug Worthington will join the team’s cheerleaders, Rampage and staff in hosting a Play 60 event Thursday from 3:30-5 p.m. at the O’Fallon Park YMCA.

RAM-BLINGS

For a team coming off a bye week, the Rams’ first injury report of the week was surprisingly extensive.Sitting out Wednesday’s workout at Rams Park were the expected injured players — linebacker Alex Ogletree (broken leg), defensive end Chris Long (knee) and tight end Lance Kendricks (finger) — but also included running back Tre Mason (ankle), wide receiver Tavon Austin (hamstring) and defensive end Robert Quinn (knee). Cornerback Janoris Jenkins (concussion) was limited.And the Browns’ list is even longer. Defensive backs Joe Haden (concussion/finger) and Tashaun Gipson (ankle) did not practice and neither did linebacker Craig Robertson (ankle) and tight end Rob Housler (hamstring). Veteran offensive lineman Joe Thomas and defensive linemen Randy Starks were given the day off to rest.

The following Cleveland players were limited on Wednesday _ tight end Gary Barnidge (ankle), linebacker Tank Carder (shoulder), defensive lineman John Hughes III (knee), wide receiver Marlon Moore (hamstring) and defensive lineman Danny Shelton (knee).

Back-up quarterback Johnny Manziel (right elbow) was a full participant in Wednesday’s workout.

• The Rams unofficial depth chart lists ex-safety Mark Barron as a starter at linebacker. Barron, who started the Green Bay game, was acquired from Tampa Bay at the trade deadline last year and is listed at 6 feet 2 and 213 pounds.

A closer look at what could be next for Rams and Rodger Saffold

Nick Wagoner

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/post/_/id/22583/a-closer-look-at-what-could-be-next-for-rams-and-rodger-saffold

EARTH CITY, Mo. — Now that the St. Louis Rams have placed right guard Rodger Saffold on injured reserve with a shoulder injury, the obvious question that many are wondering is what is next for Saffold and the team?

Given that this is Saffold’s second shoulder surgery in as many years (one to each shoulder) and his long history of injury issues, it’s a fair question to ask. We can start by examining what remains on the five-year contract Saffold signed with the team in the 2014 offseason.

Here’s the breakdown of the remaining three years:

2016

Base salary: $4.5 million (guaranteed for injury only, becomes guaranteed on third day of league year)

Signing bonus: $1 million

Roster bonus: Up to $375,000 (bonus of $23,438 per game active)

Cash value: $4.875 million

Cap value: $5.875 million

2017

Base salary: $4,722,233

Signing bonus: $1 million

Roster bonus: Up to $375,000 (bonus of $23,438 per game active)

Cash value: $5,097,233

Cap value: $6,097,233

Notes: Saffold can void this season if he reaches certain incentives.

2018

Base salary: $5 million

Signing bonus: $1 million

Roster bonus: Up to $1.375 million (bonus of $23,438 per game active plus $1 million if still on roster third day of league year)

Cash value: $6.375 million

Cap value: $7.375 million

Notes: Saffold can void this season if he reaches certain incentives.

Should the Rams release Saffold, the only money that would count against the salary cap is what’s left of the prorated signing bonus. So in addition to the $1 million of signing bonus money scheduled to count next year, the remaining $2 million would accelerate upon his release for total dead money around $3 million. The Rams still would realize a net savings of around $3 million, but still have $3 million in dead money.

While Saffold’s $4.5 million base salary for 2016 currently is guaranteed for injury only and becomes fully guaranteed on the third day of the league year, the Rams would have to make a decision before then. That means Saffold would need to pass a physical before then to be considered healthy enough to be released without an injury designation. Even if he were to pass and the Rams released him without the injury designation, Saffold still could theoretically file an injury grievance.

Of course, all of that is way down the line and assumes the Rams would release him. That’s no sure thing. The Rams have been patient with injured players in the past, bringing back high-priced veterans such as quarterback Sam Bradford, tackle Jake Long and center Scott Wells after serious injuries. But it should be noted that they parted ways with all three of those players when they suffered further injury.

On one hand, a $6 million cap hit isn’t an outrageous amount to pay a player with Saffold’s experience and versatility. And though he will have two surgically repaired shoulders, one could also argue that he’s at least had them fixed and should have fewer problems with them moving forward. For a young line, subtracting the most experienced lineman, even a year from now, is risky business without a suitable replacement lined up.

On the other hand, the Rams already have drafted youngsters Andrew Donnal and Cody Wichmann to groom for the future. Neither figures to play right away, but they’re both just another offensive line injury away from getting in the mix. If either plays and proves capable, it could make the decision easier. While $6 million isn’t a lot for a starting guard, it’s a lot for anyone who can’t stay on the field.

Regardless, we’ve reached a point where Saffold’s injury issues make it necessary for the Rams to at least weigh their options heading into the offseason.

The Rise of America’s Secret Government: The Deadly Legacy of Ex-CIA Director Allen Dulles

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/10/13/the_rise_of_americas_secret_government

David Talbot, author of the new book The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government. He is the founder and former CEO and editor-in-chief of Salon. He is also author of the best-seller, Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years.
Related

It’s been more than 50 years since Allen Dulles resigned as director of the CIA, but his legacy lives on. Between 1953 and 1961, under his watch, the CIA overthrew the governments of Iran and Guatemala, invaded Cuba, and was tied to the killing of Patrice Lumumba, Congo’s first democratically elected leader. We speak with David Talbot, author of “The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government,” about how Dulles’ time at the CIA helped shape the current national security state.
Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: It’s been over half a century since Allen Dulles resigned as director of the CIA, but his legacy lives on. Between 1953 and ’61, under his watch, the CIA overthrew the governments of Iran and Guatemala, invaded Cuba, was tied to the killing of Patrice Lumumba, Congo’s first democratically elected leader.

A new biography of Allen Dulles looks at how his time at the CIA helped shape the current national security state. Biographer David Talbot writes, quote, “The Allen Dulles story continues to haunt the country. Many of the practices that still provoke bouts of American soul-searching originated during Dulles’s formative rule at the CIA.” Talbot goes on to write, “Mind control experimentation, torture, political assassination, extraordinary rendition, mass surveillance of U.S. citizens and foreign allies—these were all widely used tools of the Dulles reign.”

Well, David Talbot joins us now to talk about his new book, The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government. He’s the founder and former CEO and editor-in-chief of Salon. David Talbot is also author of the best-seller, Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years.

It’s great to have you with us, David.

DAVID TALBOT: Great to be here, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: What an astounding book. Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden—how do they relate to Allen Dulles, the longest-reigning CIA director?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, as I write in the book and as you just pointed out, all the practices that we are wrestling with as a country now, the intelligence and security measures—including, I might add, the legacy of the killing fields in Central America that your guest was just discussing, in Guatemala and so on—that all had its roots, not after 9/11, but during the Dulles era and the Cold War. He was a man who felt he was above the law. He felt that democracy was something that should not be left in the hands of the American people or its representatives. He was part of what the famous sociologist from the 1950s, C. Wright Mills, called the power elite. And he felt that he and his brother and those types of people should be running the country.

AMY GOODMAN: John Foster Dulles, secretary of state.

DAVID TALBOT: Exactly. They were a dynamic duo, of course: His brother, Foster, as he was known, was secretary of state, as you say, under Eisenhower; he was the head of the CIA. It was a one-two punch.

AMY GOODMAN: Let’s go to Allen Dulles in his own words, speaking in 1965, defending the actions of the CIA.

ALLEN DULLES: The idea that it is necessarily nefarious, it’s always engaged in overthrowing governments, that’s false. That’s for the birds. Now, there are times—there are times when the United States government feels that the developments in another government, such as in the Vietnam situation, is of a nature to imperil the—the safety and the security and the peace of the world, and asks the Central Intelligence Agency to be its agent in that particular situation. … At no time has the CIA engaged in any political activity or any intelligence activity that was not approved at the highest level.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s Allen Dulles in 1965. “At no time,” he says. So, talk about the history, that is so intimately connected to us today. Often countries that have been—their leaders have been overthrown, know this history in a way that Americans don’t know.

DAVID TALBOT: That’s right.

AMY GOODMAN: ’53, ’54, go through it.

DAVID TALBOT: And, of course, Allen Dulles was a consummate liar and was, you know, very adept at manipulating the media, the American media. That particular interview was one of the ones that actually he got posed some of the tougher questions, by John Chancellor of NBC News. And he actually went on to say, “You know, I try to let the Congress know what I’m doing,” when Chancellor asked him, “Is there any political oversight of the CIA?” “But whenever I go to Congress,” he says, and he starts to tell the secrets of the CIA, members of Congress would say, “No, no, no, we don’t want to know. We don’t want to talk in our sleep.” So that, of course, was his cover.

Yes, overthrowing governments at will—I think one of the more tragic stories I tell in the book is the story of Patrice Lumumba, who was this young, charismatic leader, the hope of African nationalism in the Congo. And he was overthrown by a CIA-backed military coup in the Congo and later captured and brutally assassinated. The CIA’s story before the Church Committee in the 1970s: “Oh, we tried to kill him, we tried to poison him, but we’re the gang that can’t shoot straight. We’re not very good at assassinations.” Well, they were far too modest. In fact, we now know that the people who beat Patrice Lumumba to death, once he was captured, were on the payroll of the CIA.

Now, Allen Dulles kept that fact from John F. Kennedy for over a month. John Kennedy, when he was running for president, was known as the advocate, a supporter of African nationalism. They knew that once John Kennedy was inaugurated—the CIA—and was in office, that he would help Lumumba, who was in captivity at that point. And I believe that his execution, his murder, was rushed before Kennedy could get in the White House. They then withheld that information from the president for over a month. So the CIA was defying presidents all the time, and particularly in the case of Kennedy, who they felt was young, they could manipulate, and they didn’t need to really bring into their confidence.

AMY GOODMAN: So you have the CIA running international intelligence, and they’re keeping—well, you say keeping from. What makes you believe that Kennedy didn’t know?

DAVID TALBOT: That he didn’t know about the murder? Well, there’s a famous picture that was taken of him in the White House as he’s getting the phone call from—not from the CIA, but from U.N. Ambassador Adlai Stevenson, who finally tells him, a month after Lumumba has been buried and dead, about this terrible murder. And his face, as you see from this famous photograph by Jacques Lowe, the White House photographer, is crumpled in agony. I think this shows all the terrible sorrow that’s to come in the Kennedy presidency. And, you know, a lot of people think that the war between Kennedy and the CIA began after the Bay of Pigs invasion, the CIA’s disastrous operation in Cuba. That is true, it became particularly, I think, aggravated after that. But you can see from this, from day one, even before he was inaugurated, the CIA was defying him.

AMY GOODMAN: 1953, go back a few years. What is the relevance of what the Dulles brothers did in Iran with what we are seeing today in U.S.-Iranian relations?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, again, these terrible historical ripples continue from the Dulles era. Iran was trying to throw off the yoke of British colonialism. Britain, through British Petroleum, the company now known as British Petroleum, controlled all of Iran’s oil resources. And under the leadership of Mosaddegh, this popular leader who was elected by his people, he began to push back against British control and, as a result, antagonized Western oil interests, including the Dulles brothers. The Dulles brothers’ power originally came from their law firm, Sullivan & Cromwell, the most powerful law firm on Wall Street, and they represented a number of oil companies. So, once the Western oil interests were antagonized by Mosaddegh’s attempt to reclaim sovereignty over these oil resources, his days were numbered.

And so, the task of overthrowing him was given to the CIA, given to Allen Dulles. There was a very volatile situation, people supporting Mosaddegh in the streets versus the CIA-supported forces. The Shah, who was the puppet, of course, ruler of Iran on the Peacock Throne, flees, because he’s not a particularly brave man. He flees to Rome. Dulles flies to Rome. He’s busy shopping, the Shah, enjoying his exile with his glamorous wife. And Dulles is given the job of putting a little lead in his spine and getting the Shah to return to Iran after they finally succeed, the CIA, in overthrowing the popular leader, Mosaddegh.

Well, after that, that begins a reign of horror then in Iran. Democratic elements, the left, Communist Party are rounded up, tortured. And the Shah is installed in this terrible autocratic regime, that, of course, we know, had a terrible downfall during the Carter administration. And we’re still paying the price for the bitterness that the Iranian people feel towards the United States for intervening in their sovereign interests.

AMY GOODMAN: And the U.S. would go on—the Dulles brothers would go on to do the very same thing the next year, 1954, in Guatemala?

DAVID TALBOT: That’s right. They were on a roll. They thought they could do anything, exert their will anywhere in the world. Jacobo Árbenz, again, a popular, democratic leader, elected in Guatemala—

AMY GOODMAN: We only have 10 seconds in this portion.

DAVID TALBOT: The Kennedy of Guatemala is overthrown, again, by the Dulles brothers, partly because they were representatives of United Fruit. United Fruit was a major power player in Guatemala.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to leave it there, but we’re going to do Part 2, and we’re going to post it online. David Talbot is author of the new book, The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government. David Talbot is founder and editor-in-chief at Salon.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman. Our guest is David Talbot. His book is The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government. He’s the founder and former CEO and editor-in-chief of Salon. Let’s start with the title, The Devil’s Chessboard. Why did you call it that, David?

DAVID TALBOT: The Devil’s Chessboard refers to the fact that the Dulles brothers—John Foster Dulles, who’s secretary of state under Eisenhower, and his brother, Allen Dulles, who I focus on, head of the CIA—they loved to play chess with each other. They would go at it for hours, even when Allen Dulles was about to be married. He kept his wife-to-be waiting around while the two brothers went at it. And they tended to look at the world as their chessboard. People were pawns to be manipulated. So I felt that was a—you know, an apt metaphor.

But, Amy, I wanted to go back to what you were talking about—alternative media—before this. I think—I just want to underline what you were saying about how essential it is to have countervoices. They are the lifeblood of democracy. And shows like yours and public radio are just essential. You know, my book is having a hard time getting through the media gatekeepers. They don’t want to hear about this, and in part because the CIA, particularly under Allen Dulles, but even today, are masters at manipulating the media. I’ve been on shows and been bumped. I was scheduled to be on shows at the last minute, strangely. I was supposed to write something for Politico magazine. Someone there called the book a “masterpiece.” They wanted the book to be, you know, showcased there. Instead, I was bumped from Politico. And an article based on recently leaked CIA documents—conveniently leaked—was written by a former New York Times reporter, Phil Shenon, and what he did was to basically accuse Fidel Castro of assassinating President Kennedy. This has been a CIA disinformation line for years. So the CIA is still manipulating the media, and it’s essential that independent media exists, like this.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about the relationship between The New York Times publisher, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, and Allen Dulles?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, the Sulzberger family had a long relationship with Dulles. When he was inaugurated as CIA director, one of the Sulzbergers wrote to him, saying, “This is the best news I’ve heard in years.” In another letter, he calls him affectionately “Ally.” They were on a first name basis. They belonged to the same clubs. They were masters at—the Dulles brothers, particularly Allen—at manipulating the media. After the Warren Report comes out, the official investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy, one of the top editors at Newsweek writes to Allen Dulles. And I’m getting all this from Allen Dulles’s own files; he was very proud of the fact that he could—he had the media in the palm of his hand. But this Newsweek editor writes to him, “Thank you so much for basically directing our coverage of the Warren Report. We couldn’t have done it without you.” So, you know, this was the kind of cozy relationship that existed between the CIA and the media in those years. CBS, Newsweek, The New York Times, The Washington Post, they were all in the palm of the CIA’s hands. They all lived together in Georgetown. They had cocktail parties together. It was a very cozy set.

AMY GOODMAN: You know, in Guatemala today, there has been a popular uprising. It has been quite astounding. Otto Pérez Molina, OPM, the president, was thrown out, is in jail right now. I wanted to go to Allan Nairn, longtime investigative reporter, who was in Guatemala during this period. And this also goes back to 1954. But Allan Nairn has been covering Guatemala since the 1980s.

ALLAN NAIRN: This is an oligarchy in Guatemala which kills its own unionists, which kills peasants who try to organize the plantations, which works hand in glove with Washington and is now trying to hold onto their power, because, for the first time, it’s under threat. I mean, this is a historic moment. It all began in 1954, when the CIA invaded Guatemala, overthrew a democratically elected government and put the army in power. And now, the people have risen.

AMY GOODMAN: So, that’s Allan Nairn talking about this most recent uprising. But, David Talbot, can you go back to 1954, where we left off in Part 1 of our conversation, and talk about what actually happened? Who was Allen Dulles, the CIA director, and his brother, John Foster Dulles, the state—the secretary of state, working for?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, of course, their original power goes back to Sullivan & Cromwell, this very powerful Wall Street law firm that John Foster Dulles ran and where Allen Dulles worked. And among their clients was United Fruit. United Fruit, of course, was this colossus, this corporate colossus, that ruled much of Latin America, owned, you know, vast acreage in Guatemala and many other countries. They weren’t just a banana company. They were a multinational real estate company. They owned often the utilities. And they owned the local political elites in those countries.

In the early ’50s, Jacobo Árbenz, this young military officer, a reform officer, starts to emerge as a potential leader. He runs for president and is elected by his people on a reform campaign. And one of the first things he does, of course, in this country that’s basically a medieval country ruled by land barons, is to begin to nationalize some of the land, that’s not being even used by United [Fruit], and give it to the people themselves, the farmers, to work. And this provokes a major backlash from United Fruit, from the local political elites, the oligarchs, and from the CIA. Allen Dulles, working for Eisenhower as CIA director, portrays Jacobo Árbenz as a dangerous communist—he wasn’t—and prepares to overthrow him in a military coup, which does occur.

What I tell the story of, mostly I focus on, is the tragic aftermath of that coup, because not only for the Árbenz family, which, in some ways, were the Kennedys of Guatemala—glamorous, young couple, Jacobo and María Árbenz, their children, very good-looking, wealthy, but very committed to uplifting the poor in that country. And after the coup, they’re sent into a terrible exile. No country will touch them, because CIA pressure. The CIA and the State Department pressure every country, from Mexico throughout Latin America, not to take the Árbenz family in. They’re finally forced to go behind the Iron Curtain to Czechoslovakia to seek exile. They’re not happy there. They finally end up back in Mexico, but they’re under tight supervision. The family is haunted. It’s stalked wherever it goes. One of his daughters commits suicide. And Jacobo Árbenz himself ends up dead under mysterious circumstances—scalded to death in a bathtub in a Mexico City hotel. His family today believes that he was assassinated. And given the fact that the CIA had a death list of left-wing figures, journalists, political leaders, after the coup that were to be eliminated, that, you know, is a distinct possibility.

So, these ripples of tragedy, after these coups, go on and on. You know, the CIA and Allen Dulles told Eisenhower after the Guatemala coup, “Oh, it was a clean coup. You know, hardly anyone died.” But the fact is, tens of thousands of people died in the killing fields of Guatemala as a result of that coup, and that violence continues today.

AMY GOODMAN: And wasn’t it also a precursor to what happened with the Bay of Pigs? Move forward like, what, six years, and explain what happened.

DAVID TALBOT: Right. Well, emboldened by how easy it was to do a regime change in Guatemala, yes, when Fidel Castro comes to power in Cuba, he again antagonizes the same corporate interests that the Dulles brothers represent—oil companies, like the Rockefeller-owned Standard Oil, and others, agribusiness firms. So they believe that Fidel has to be eliminated, and they begin plotting, under the Eisenhower administration, with Eisenhower’s approval, to kill, to assassinate Fidel Castro. And, in fact, at one point, Fidel Castro, who was beloved in this country after the revolution—he had overthrown a thug, a Mafia-backed thug, Batista, a very corrupt and violent dictatorship. He was seen as the future, and very glamorous, he and Che Guevara and so on. They would come to New York and would be mobbed by people in the streets. When they came to New York for a U.N. meeting in 1960, though, the Eisenhower administration was already pushing back, and no hotel would take them. Finally, a hotel in Midtown did take them, but there was—they asked for so much money as security, they were basically blackmailing Fidel. He was outraged, and he ended up staying in a hotel in Harlem that took him in.

AMY GOODMAN: Hotel Theresa.

DAVID TALBOT: Hotel Theresa. And they stood up to this Washington pressure, the manager of that hotel, who was African-American. He had grown up in Jim Crow South. And he said, “You know, I know what it’s like to be denied a roof over your head. This Cuban delegation can stay here.” So it was a very—

AMY GOODMAN: Did he meet Malcolm X there?

DAVID TALBOT: He did. It was a very dramatic moment. Malcolm X makes a visit to the Hotel Theresa. He squeezes into his suite, where there’s dozens of people crammed. They have a very interesting encounter, Fidel and Malcolm. And it really changed their lives and had a big impact on both of those men for years afterwards. In fact, Malcolm said he was one of the few white men that he learned to respect and appreciate. And, by the way, there was an FBI guy taking notes the whole time in that hotel room, so we know some of what happened there and the dialogue, because of the FBI report on this.

AMY GOODMAN: Who was it?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, his name was not revealed, but there was an agent surveilling him. But meanwhile, while Fidel is there, meeting with Khrushchev from the Soviet Union and Nasser from Egypt and the world leaders and embarrassing the Eisenhower administration, because here he’s gone to Harlem, and, you know, no one else would take him in, in Midtown Manhattan—meanwhile, the Mafia is meeting with CIA agents at the Plaza Hotel, just blocks away, plotting his assassination. So, a lot of intrigue in 1960 going on in New York. And then, to make it even more interesting, a young JFK, who’s campaigning for president, after Fidel has left, shows up at the Hotel Theresa and basically says, “This is revolutionary ground I’m standing on. And we should welcome the winds of change and the revolution, the future. We shouldn’t be afraid of it.” So, very end—and begins to talk about the mortality rate of black infants in Harlem and many of the issues that are still current.

AMY GOODMAN: And yet, look at what President Kennedy, then President Kennedy, did, when it came to Cuba—

DAVID TALBOT: Exactly.

AMY GOODMAN: —what happened under his reign, from the Bay of Pigs to the endless assassination attempts of Fidel Castro.

DAVID TALBOT: Kennedy did do a flip-flop, to an extent, after that. He came in as president. He was young. He was untested, under a lot of pressure from the national security people in his administration. He inherited the Bay of Pigs operation, the plans for that. He was basically told, “Look, if you pull the plug on this thing, it’s so far along now, there will be a major political backlash against you.” So he was kind of sandbagged by the CIA. He did go through with it, but he had no intention of widening it into an all-out U.S. military assault on the island, on Cuba. But that’s what the CIA had in mind. They knew that this motley crew of Cuban exiles they put together to invade the island wasn’t sufficient to unseat Castro. But what they hoped and what they planned was that a young President Kennedy, as this invasion was bogged down on the beaches of the Bay of Pigs, would be forced then to send in the Marines and the U.S. Air Force to topple Castro.

AMY GOODMAN: And then, of course, the Cuban missile crisis, the closest we ever came to a nuclear war.

DAVID TALBOT: Well, but Kennedy stood his ground, and he didn’t do that. And that was the beginning of his break, at the Bay of Pigs, between the CIA and Cuba—and President Kennedy. And then, yes, that became even more severe with the Cuban missile crisis the following year. Again, the military in this country and the CIA thought that we could take, you know, Castro out. During the Cuban missile crisis, they were prepared to go to a nuclear war to do that. President Kennedy thought people like Curtis LeMay, who was head of the Air Force, General Curtis LeMay, was half-mad. He said, “I don’t even see this man in my—you know, in my sight,” because he was pushing for a nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union. And even years later, Curtis LeMay, after years after Kennedy is dead, in an interview that I quote from in the book, bitterly complains that Kennedy didn’t take this opportunity to go nuclear over Cuba. So, President Kennedy basically, I think, saved my life—I was 12 years old at the time—saved a lot of our lives, because he did stand his ground. He took a hard line against the national security people and said, “No, we’re going to peacefully resolve the Cuban missile crisis.”

AMY GOODMAN: And then President Kennedy, on November 22nd, 1963, was assassinated.

DAVID TALBOT: That’s right.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to David Talbot, who is author of The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government. What did you find when it came to Kennedy’s assassination?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, first of all, after Kennedy did fire Allen Dulles after the Bay of Pigs, Dulles didn’t get the memo. He went home to Georgetown and continued to operate from his home as if he were still running the CIA. His top deputies came on a regular basis to meet with him. He—

AMY GOODMAN: You had notes of his wife and his mistress.

DAVID TALBOT: That’s right. I found his daybook, who he was meeting with. I read his—the correspondence. I read his mistress’s diaries and journals.

AMY GOODMAN: Who was his mistress?

DAVID TALBOT: A woman named Mary Bancroft, a very interesting woman, related to the gentleman who started or was the top editor at The Wall Street Journal. She had aspirations of her own. She became a spy for Allen Dulles in Switzerland during World War II when they started their affair. And curiously, then, when his wife shows up in Switzerland at the end of the war, Clover Dulles, the two women become friends. Clover Dulles figures out what’s been going on. She kind of gives it a pass. And the two women then form a tight bond throughout the rest of their lives. And their correspondence is fascinating. They both were patients of Carl Jung, one of the founding fathers of psychiatry in Switzerland.

And they called Allen Dulles “The Shark,” these two women, because they both knew the kind of man they were dealing with—full of surface charm and, you know, a very popular party guest on the Washington circuit, but underneath a very cold man, a man who was capable of sending people to their death with the blink of an eye, a man who was capable of putting his own child, Allen Jr., in the hands of an experimental doctor who was working for the CIA in the notorious MKULTRA program, which Naomi Klein and others have written about.

AMY GOODMAN: Explain it very briefly, and what happened to Allen Jr.?

DAVID TALBOT: MKULTRA was—they called it the Manhattan Project of the mind. It was an attempt by the CIA, funding—millions of dollars—funding scientists and doctors around the country, major institutions, to see if we could program people for whatever purpose. It was a mind control program. His son, Allen Jr., came back from the war, Korean War, with a piece of shrapnel in his brain. He was brain-damaged, and the family had difficulty with him. He was trying to find his way. And at one point, Allen Dulles put him in the hands of this scientist here in New York who did unspeakable sort of experiments on him involving insulin overdose therapy, which is a very traumatic therapy—convulsions, sometimes resulting in death. His sister was appalled—Allen Dulles’s daughter—when she went to visit him in the hospital. And it was from her that I got this story.

Joan Dulles is a very amazing woman—Joan Talley, as she’s known today, a retired Jungian therapist in New Mexico, drives a Prius with an Obama sticker on it. I’m sure her father is spinning in his grave. But she, herself, like many of us, at the age of 90 when I interviewed her, was grappling with this dark legacy in America, that played out within her own family. You know, she’s looking back on this now and is appalled, in some way, that she—it was a part of her life. But she’s reading the books—and I hope she reads mine—and is coming to some kind of determination about her father.

AMY GOODMAN: And explain what MKULTRA was used for.

DAVID TALBOT: Well, MKULTRA, among other things, they were seeing if they could program a Manchurian candidate, assassins who would act in a robotic-like fashion to kill on CIA command. They were also using it as enhanced interrogation, as we call it today. Soviet prisoners who would fall into our hands, they were—

AMY GOODMAN: And the drug is actually?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, many different drugs, psychedelic—LSD was one of the drugs. They subjected—there was a particular place in Canada at the Allan Institute and McGill University in Canada, where one of these doctors, Dr. Ewen Cameron, he operated something called the sleep room, where women, many—mostly women, and patients of his would be put. These were people who were suffering from common neurotic disorders, postpartum depression and so on. And they were put in this sleep room and, through massive doses of various psychedelic drugs, were put into a sleep state, and then tape loops were played over and over again in an attempt to erase their bad patterns of thinking, and often wiping out their memory. They would come out of these experiments not knowing their family, who they were. In one case, a woman was reduced to an infantile state. She couldn’t use a toilet. And this was the wife of a Canadian—a member of the Canadian Parliament. So this was all CIA-funded research during the Cold War, and it was, you know, basically the most inhumane sort of methods being used on people.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to David Talbot, and we digressed from the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

DAVID TALBOT: Yes.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about what you learned in writing The Devil’s Chessboard.

DAVID TALBOT: Well, as I was saying, after he was fired by Kennedy, Dulles went to his home. He continued—

AMY GOODMAN: And why was he fired?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, he was fired after the Bay of Pigs. Kennedy realized he shouldn’t have kept Dulles on from the Eisenhower years. They were philosophically too different. And the Bay of Pigs was the final straw for him. So he was pushed out after that.

And—but Dulles, as I say, continued to sort of set up an anti-Kennedy government in exile in his home in Georgetown. Many of the people he was meeting with, several of the people, including Howard Hunt and others, later became figures of suspicion during the House Select Committee on Assassination hearings in Washington in the 1970s. You know, most Americans don’t know that that was the last official statement, the last official report, on the Kennedy assassination, not the Warren Report back in 1964. But the Congress reopened the investigation into John Kennedy’s assassination, and they did determine he was killed as the result of a conspiracy.

So a number of the people who came up during this investigation by Congress were figures of interest who were meeting with Allen Dulles. They had no, you know, obvious reason to be meeting with a “retired” CIA official. The weekend of Kennedy’s assassination, Allen Dulles is not at home watching television like the rest of America. He’s at a remote CIA facility, two years after being pushed out of the agency by Kennedy, called The Farm, in northern Virginia, that he used when he was director of the CIA as a kind of an alternate command post. Well, he’s there while Kennedy is killed, after Kennedy is killed, when Jack Ruby then kills Lee Harvey Oswald. That whole fateful weekend, he’s hunkered down in a CIA command post. So, there are many odd circumstances like this.

I also found out from interviewing the children of another former CIA official that one of the key figures of interest in the Kennedy assassination, a guy named William Harvey, who was head of the CIA-Mafia plot against Castro and hated the Kennedys, thought that they were weak and so on, he was seen leaving his Rome station and flying to Dallas, by his own deputy, on an airplane early in November 1963. This is a remarkable sighting, because to place someone like William Harvey, the head of the CIA’s assassination unit, put there by Allen Dulles, in Dallas in November of ’63 before the assassination is a very important fact. The CIA, by the way, refuses, even at this late date, to release the travel vouchers for people like William Harvey. Under the JFK Records Act, that was passed back in the 1990s, they are compelled by federal law to release all documents related to the Kennedy assassination, but they’re still withholding over 1,100 of these documents, including—and I—

AMY GOODMAN: Fifteen seconds.

DAVID TALBOT: I used the Freedom of Information Act to try and get the travel vouchers for William Harvey. They’re still holding onto them.

AMY GOODMAN: How many calls are you getting in the mainstream media to do interviews?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, thank God, I was saying earlier, for alternative media, like this, Amy, because there is resistance to this book. First of all, I call out the mainstream media. I say that New York Times, CBS, Washington Post, Newsweek, they were all under his thumb. They did his bidding.

AMY GOODMAN: Whose thumb?

DAVID TALBOT: Allen Dulles’s thumb. So, when the Warren Report came out, I was saying that one of the editors, top editors, at Newsweek wrote to him and said, “Thank you so much, Mr. Dulles, for helping shape our coverage of the Warren Report.” Well, of course, Allen Dulles was on the Warren Commission. In fact, some people thought it should have been called the Dulles Commission, because he dominated it so much. So, you know, it’s way too cozy, the relationship between Washington power and the media. And—

AMY GOODMAN: What was the relationship between Arthur Hays Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times, and Allen Dulles, the head of the CIA?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, they were social friends, not just him, but other members of the Sulzberger family. I found, you know, cozy correspondence between them, congratulating him when he was inaugurated, Dulles, as CIA director. They called him “Ally,” one of the Sulzberger families, in one letter. They would get together, you know, every year. Dulles would hold these media sort of drink fests for New Year’s. And these were, you know, top reporters, top editors, would get together with the CIA guys and rub elbows and get a little drunk. And, you know, when Allen Dulles didn’t want a reporter, because he felt he was being overly aggressive, covering, say, Guatemala—Sydney Gruson, the reporter—in the run-up to the coup there in 1954, he had—he made a call to The New York Times and had him removed. That was because of his relationship with Sulzberger, the publisher. So, that was the kind of pull that Allen Dulles had.

AMY GOODMAN: How did that work?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, they just took him out. They removed Gruson. They transferred him, I think to Mexico, at that point.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you compare Smedley Butler, the general, who was—called himself, what? A racketeer for capitalism, when he was asked to overthrow countries and said no—

DAVID TALBOT: Yeah.

AMY GOODMAN: —to Allen Dulles?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, one’s a hero, and one’s a villain, to put it pure and simple. Smedley Darlington Butler, who I’ve also written about—I wrote an illustrated history, for readers of all ages, called Devil Dog. Smedley was an American hero. He was a guy who joined the Marines at 16, didn’t know any better, ran off all around the world fighting America’s imperial wars from China to throughout Latin America, ended up in France during World War I. And by the time he was a middle-aged man, he had seen the kind of dirty work that was done by America’s soldiers in the name of American business interests. And he said he was like Al Capone. He said, “We marines were like Al Capone, except that Al Capone couldn’t even measure up to us, the kind of thuggery that we were capable of, that we committed in America’s name throughout Latin America, particularly.”

AMY GOODMAN: And wasn’t it just not through Latin America, like overthrowing Árbenz, but wasn’t the Pitcairn family in the United States involved with attempting a coup against FDR and wanted to recruit Smedley Butler to do it?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, that’s what—as I write in my book, that it was his great moment of heroism, because he was a hero to soldiers, to the rank and file. He had spoken to the famous Bonus Army March, where World War I veterans were demanding pay for the time they had lost when they were overseas. He spoke before them. It was a very controversial thing he did as a retired officer, retired general from the Marines. And so, because he was so popular with the rank and file, when a number of corporate families like the DuPonts and others became furious at FDR for being a class traitor, as they called him, and pushing through these Wall Street reforms and other things that were infuriating them, they went to—representatives of theirs went to Smedley Butler and said, “Would you lead a march again, like the Bonus Army March on Washington? But this time we want them to be armed, the soldiers to be armed.” Essentially, “Will you lead a coup against Franklin Roosevelt?” And instead of going along with this, he went before Congress and outed this plot.

AMY GOODMAN: And who were the families? Who were the—

DAVID TALBOT: Well, DuPonts were one of them. The family that owned Remington, the arms factory, was also involved. A number of these people were clients of the Dulleses. Foster Dulles, by the way, John Foster Dulles, who later became secretary of state, ran the Wall Street firm Sullivan & Cromwell. When FDR starts to push through some of these reforms, like the Security Exchange Commission and others, Glass-Steagall, he convenes all his wealthy clients in his office on Wall Street and says, “Just ignore this. We’ll resist this. We won’t go along with these reforms.”

AMY GOODMAN: The Nazis? Very quickly.

DAVID TALBOT: The Nazis, well, they have a very tight relationship, many Nazi businessmen, with the Dulles brothers. And when Allen Dulles was in Switzerland, supposedly working for our side, the OSS, during the war, he was actually using that to meet with a lot of Nazis and to cut separate deals with them. He did indeed finally cut a separate peace deal with the Nazi forces in Italy against FDR’s wishes. FDR had a policy of unconditional surrender. Don’t—

AMY GOODMAN: This was Operation Paperclip?

DAVID TALBOT: This was Operation Sunrise, was this deal that he made. And then he set up these rat-lines, so-called, where Nazis, leading Nazi war criminals, escaped after the war through the Alps in Switzerland, down into Italy and then overseas to Latin America and even in the United States. One of the key Nazis he saved was Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s former chief of intelligence, who he installed, Dulles, as head of West German intelligence after the war, a man who should have stood trial at Nuremberg.

AMY GOODMAN: Who turned you down?

DAVID TALBOT: You know, well, Politico was one. Politico, you know, one of the leading publications, online publications and a print publication, you know, had—I was supposed to write something for them there. Instead, they went with a piece by, as I say, a former New York Times guy named Phil Shenon, based on leaked CIA documents that basically pin the Kennedy assassination on Fidel Castro. This is absurd. Fidel Castro, when he heard about Kennedy’s assassination, crumpled. He knew that Kennedy was trying to open back channels with him to establish peace between Cuba and the United States, years before Obama finally did. In fact, Jean Daniel, who was a French reporter, was with Fidel, at Kennedy’s behest, in Havana, basically carrying this olive branch to Fidel from Kennedy, when they got the terrible news from Dallas.

AMY GOODMAN: Who do you think killed John Kennedy?

DAVID TALBOT: Well, I believe what Robert Kennedy believed. Robert Kennedy, as I showed in my book earlier, Brothers, and in this book, looked immediately at the killing team that was put together by the CIA to kill Fidel Castro. That CIA killing team, I think, was responsible for killing President Kennedy, as well. That team that was killing foreign leaders, that was targeting foreign leaders, that Dulles had assembled, including men like William Harvey, Howard Hunt, David Morales—these were all key figures of suspicion by Congress during the House Assassinations Committee investigation in the ’70s. That was the team that was brought to Dallas. I now identify those men. A couple of them admitted—Howard Hunt, on his death bed, admitted that he was involved in the Kennedy assassination, and the mainstream media completely overlooked this shocking—

AMY GOODMAN: Howard Hunt, who was Watergate.

DAVID TALBOT: He was the leader of the Watergate break-in and a legendary CIA action officer, and very close to Allen Dulles, revered Allen Dulles. On his death bed, he revealed that he was part of that plot. Again, 60 Minutes looked at it and then walked away. I know a lot about this story. But the media has been, I think, shockingly remiss in not looking into this investigation. It’s a taboo subject. But it’s clear—I think I present overwhelming evidence that Allen Dulles was complicit in this, in the assassination of the president. And he conveniently ran the investigation into the president’s murder, because he strong-armed President Johnson into appointing him to the Warren Commission, where he became the dominant figure.

AMY GOODMAN: David Talbot, author of the new book, The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Governmen

URL = http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence

In the years since Columbine, school shootings changed; they became ritualized.

In the years since Columbine, school shootings changed; they became ritualized.
Credit Illustration by Oliver Munday

On the evening of April 29th last year, in the southern Minnesota town of Waseca, a woman was doing the dishes when she looked out her kitchen window and saw a young man walking through her back yard. He was wearing a backpack and carrying a fast-food bag and was headed in the direction of the MiniMax Storage facility next to her house. Something about him didn’t seem right. Why was he going through her yard instead of using the sidewalk? He walked through puddles, not around them. He fiddled with the lock of Unit 129 as if he were trying to break in. She called the police. A group of three officers arrived and rolled up the unit’s door. The young man was standing in the center. He was slight of build, with short-cropped brown hair and pale skin. Scattered around his feet was an assortment of boxes and containers: motor oil, roof cement, several Styrofoam coolers, a can of ammunition, a camouflage bag, and cardboard boxes labeled “red iron oxide,” filled with a red powder. His name was John LaDue. He was seventeen years old.

One of the officers started to pat LaDue down. According to the police report, “LaDue immediately became defensive, stating that it is his storage unit and asked what I was doing and pulling away.” The officers asked him to explain what he was up to. LaDue told them to guess. Another of the officers, Tim Schroeder, said he thought LaDue was making bombs. LaDue admitted that he was, but said that he didn’t want to talk about it in the storage locker. The four went back to the Waseca police station, and LaDue and Schroeder sat down together with a tape recorder between them. “What’s going on today, John?” Schroeder asked. LaDue replied, “It’s going to be hard for me to talk about.” The interview began at 7:49 P.M. It continued for almost three hours.

He was making Molotov cocktails, LaDue said, but a deadlier variant of the traditional kind, using motor oil and tar instead of gasoline. From there, he intended to move on to bigger and more elaborate pressure-cooker bombs, of the sort used by the Tsarnaev brothers at the Boston Marathon bombing. “There are far more things out in that unit than meet the eye,” he told Schroeder, listing various kinds of explosive powder, thousands of ball bearings, pipes for pipe bombs, fifteen pounds of potassium perchlorate, nine pounds of aluminum powder, and “magnesium ribbon and rust which I use to make thermite, which burns at five thousand degrees Celsius.”

Schroeder asked him what his intentions were.
“I have a notebook under my bed that explains it,” LaDue replied.
Schroeder: “O.K. Can you talk to me about those intentions that are in the notebook?”
LaDue: “O.K. Sometime before the end of the school year, my plan was to steal a recycling bin from the school and take one of the pressure cookers I made and put it in the hallway and blow it up during passing period time. . . . I would detonate when people were fleeing, just like the Boston bombings, and blow them up too. Then my plans were to enter and throw Molotov cocktails and pipe bombs and destroy everyone and then when the SWAT comes I would destroy myself.”

In his bedroom, he had an SKS assault rifle with sixty rounds of ammunition, a Beretta 9-mm. handgun, a gun safe with an additional firearm, and three ready-made explosive devices. On the day of the attack, he would start with a .22-calibre rifle and move on to a shotgun, in order to prove that high-capacity assault-style rifles were unnecessary for an effective school attack.

Schroeder: “Do you have brothers and sisters?”

LaDue: “Yes, I have a sister. She’s one year older than me.”

Schroeder: “O.K. She goes to school too?”

LaDue: “Yes.”

Schroeder: “She’s a senior?”

LaDue: “She is.”

Schroeder: “O.K. So you would have done this stuff while she was at school as well?”

LaDue: “I forgot to mention a detail. Before that day, I was planning to dispose of my family too.”

Schroeder: “Why would you dispose of your family? What, what have they done?”

LaDue: “They did nothing wrong. I just wanted as many victims as possible.”

On February 2, 1996, in Moses Lake, Washington, a fourteen-year-old named Barry Loukaitis walked into Frontier Middle School dressed in a black duster and carrying two handguns, seventy-eight rounds of ammunition, and a hunting rifle. He killed two students and wounded a third before shooting his algebra teacher in the back. In the next two years, there were six more major incidents, in quick succession: sixteen-year-old Evan Ramsey, in Bethel, Alaska; sixteen-year-old Luke Woodham, in Pearl, Mississippi; fourteen-year-old Michael Carneal, in West Paducah, Kentucky; thirteen-year-old Mitchell Johnson and eleven-year-old Andrew Golden, in Jonesboro, Arkansas; fourteen-year-old Andrew Wurst, in Edinboro, Pennsylvania; and fifteen-year-old Kip Kinkel, in Springfield, Oregon. In April of 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold launched their infamous attack on Columbine High, in Littleton, Colorado, and from there the slaughter has continued, through the thirty-two killed and seventeen wounded by Seung-Hui Cho at Virginia Tech, in 2007; the twenty-six killed by Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook Elementary School, in 2012; and the nine killed by Christopher Harper-Mercer earlier this month at Umpqua Community College, in Oregon. Since Sandy Hook, there have been more than a hundred and forty school shootings in the United States.

School shootings are a modern phenomenon. There were scattered instances of gunmen or bombers attacking schools in the years before Barry Loukaitis, but they were lower profile. School shootings mostly involve young white men. And, not surprisingly, given the ready availability of firearms in the United States, the phenomenon is overwhelmingly American. But, beyond those facts, the great puzzle is how little school shooters fit any kind of pattern.

Evan Ramsey, who killed his mother and then walked into his high school with a 12-gauge shotgun, had a chaotic home life. His mother was an alcoholic who lived with a series of violent men. In one two-year stretch, he lived in ten foster homes and was both sexually and physically abused. When Evan was six, his father sent an ad to the local newspaper which it declined to publish, so he packed two guns, chained the door of the newspaper, set off smoke grenades, and held the publisher at gunpoint.

But Kip Kinkel, who shot his parents, then killed two others and wounded twenty-five at his high school, had not been traumatized. He had a loving family. He was the child of schoolteachers so beloved that seventeen hundred people came to their memorial service. Kinkel was psychotic: he thought the Chinese were preparing to attack the United States, that Disney had plans for world domination, and that the government had placed a computer chip inside his head.

Meanwhile, the architect of the Columbine killings, Eric Harris, was a classic psychopath. He was charming and manipulative. He was a habitual lawbreaker: he stole, vandalized, bought guns illegally, set off homemade bombs, and at one point hacked into his school’s computer system. He wrote “Ich bin Gott”—German for “I am God”—in his school planner. His journals were filled with fantasies about rape and mutilation: “I want to tear a throat out with my own teeth like a pop can. I want to gut someone with my hand, to tear a head off and rip out the heart and lungs from the neck, to stab someone in the gut, shove it up to their heart.” A school shooter, it appears, could be someone who had been brutally abused by the world or someone who imagined that the world brutally abused him or someone who wanted to brutally abuse the world himself.

The LaDue case does not resolve this puzzle. LaDue doesn’t hear voices. He isn’t emotional or malicious or angry or vindictive. Schroeder asks him about violent games, and he says he hasn’t been playing them much recently. Then they talk about violent music, and LaDue says he’s been playing guitar for eight years and has little patience for the “retarded” music of “bands like Bullet for My Valentine or Asking Alexandria or some crap like that.” He likes Metallica: solid, normal, old-school heavy metal. “I was not bullied at all,” LaDue tells Schroeder. “I don’t think I have ever been bullied in my life. . . . I have good parents. I live in a good town.”

When the interview is concluded, the police drive over to see LaDue’s parents. They live a few minutes away, in a tidy two-story stucco house on a corner lot. The LaDues are frantic. It is 10:30 P.M., and their son is never out past nine on a school night. His mother is trying to track him down on her laptop through his cell-phone account. They are calling all the people he has most recently texted, trying to find him. Then the police arrive with the news that their son has threatened to kill his family and blow up Waseca High School—and the LaDues are forced to account for a fact entirely outside their imagining. No, his son has never been diagnosed with mental illness or depression, David LaDue, John’s father, tells the police. He isn’t taking any medication. He’s never expressed a desire to hurt anyone. He spends a lot of time in front of his computer looking at YouTube videos. He likes to experiment with what his father calls his “interesting devices.” He wears a lot of black. Isn’t that what teen-agers do? David LaDue is desperate to come up with something—anything—to make sense of what he has just been told. “David told me that after his son had stayed with his brother for a couple of months at the beginning of last summer, he had returned proclaiming to be an atheist, stating that he no longer believed in religion,” the police report says.

Then:
David LaDue also spoke of an incident when Austin Walters and John LaDue had gone deer hunting. John had reportedly shot a deer that had not died right away and had to be “finished off.” David LaDue stated that he heard that Austin’s cell phone was used to make a video of the deer that he felt was inappropriate, although he had never seen the video. David LaDue showed me a photo on his laptop of John LaDue leering, holding a semi-automatic rifle next to a deer that had been killed. David LaDue pointed to the picture stating that “this” was the facial expression he was talking about that he thought was concerning.

It is the best he can do.
It was the best anyone could do that night. Waseca is a community of some ten thousand people amid the cornfields of southern Minnesota: one high school, a Walmart, a beautiful lake just outside town. Minneapolis is well over an hour away. There was simply no room, in anyone’s cultural understanding, for the acts John LaDue was describing. By the end, a kind of fatigue seemed to set in, and the normal codes of Midwestern civility reasserted themselves. All that the interrogation or confession or conversation—whatever it was—between Schroeder and LaDue seems to have established is that we need a new way to make sense of the school-shooting phenomenon.

Schroeder: “Until we can figure out, ah, what exactly is where we are all at, we’re just going to take you up and, um, put you in a cell, or holding cell for the time being, until we can get it figured out.”

LaDue: “O.K.”

Schroeder: “O.K.”

LaDue: “Hmm, hmm.”

Cartoon

Buy the print »

Schroeder: “I’ll let you put your shoes on. Yah, I’ll hold on to your phone for now. . . . All right. Before we, I’ll let you put your shoes on.”

LaDue: “I’m wearing contacts by the way. What should I do with them?”

Schroeder: “You can keep them in.”

LaDue: “O.K. . . . Are you going to handcuff me?”

Schroeder: “I am going to cuff ya.”

LaDue: [inaudible]

Schroeder: “I’m going to double pat you down again.”

Then, almost apologetically, he adds, “I know I already did once.”

In a famous essay published four decades ago, the Stanford sociologist Mark Granovetter set out to explain a paradox: “situations where outcomes do not seem intuitively consistent with the underlying individual preferences.” What explains a person or a group of people doing things that seem at odds with who they are or what they think is right? Granovetter took riots as one of his main examples, because a riot is a case of destructive violence that involves a great number of otherwise quite normal people who would not usually be disposed to violence.

Most previous explanations had focussed on explaining how someone’s beliefs might be altered in the moment. An early theory was that a crowd cast a kind of intoxicating spell over its participants. Then the argument shifted to the idea that rioters might be rational actors: maybe at the moment a riot was beginning people changed their beliefs. They saw what was at stake and recalculated their estimations of the costs and benefits of taking part.

But Granovetter thought it was a mistake to focus on the decision-making processes of each rioter in isolation. In his view, a riot was not a collection of individuals, each of whom arrived independently at the decision to break windows. A riot was a social process, in which people did things in reaction to and in combination with those around them. Social processes are driven by our thresholds—which he defined as the number of people who need to be doing some activity before we agree to join them. In the elegant theoretical model Granovetter proposed, riots were started by people with a threshold of zero—instigators willing to throw a rock through a window at the slightest provocation. Then comes the person who will throw a rock if someone else goes first. He has a threshold of one. Next in is the person with the threshold of two. His qualms are overcome when he sees the instigator and the instigator’s accomplice. Next to him is someone with a threshold of three, who would never break windows and loot stores unless there were three people right in front of him who were already doing that—and so on up to the hundredth person, a righteous upstanding citizen who nonetheless could set his beliefs aside and grab a camera from the broken window of the electronics store if everyone around him was grabbing cameras from the electronics store.

Granovetter was most taken by the situations in which people did things for social reasons that went against everything they believed as individuals. “Most did not think it ‘right’ to commit illegal acts or even particularly want to do so,” he wrote, about the findings of a study of delinquent boys. “But group interaction was such that none could admit this without loss of status; in our terms, their threshold for stealing cars is low because daring masculine acts bring status, and reluctance to join, once others have, carries the high cost of being labeled a sissy.” You can’t just look at an individual’s norms and motives. You need to look at the group.

His argument has a second implication. We misleadingly use the word “copycat” to describe contagious behavior—implying that new participants in an epidemic act in a manner identical to the source of their infection. But rioters are not homogeneous. If a riot evolves as it spreads, starting with the hotheaded rock thrower and ending with the upstanding citizen, then rioters are a profoundly heterogeneous group.

Finally, Granovetter’s model suggests that riots are sometimes more than spontaneous outbursts. If they evolve, it means they have depth and length and a history. Granovetter thought that the threshold hypothesis could be used to describe everything from elections to strikes, and even matters as prosaic as how people decide it’s time to leave a party. He was writing in 1978, long before teen-age boys made a habit of wandering through their high schools with assault rifles. But what if the way to explain the school-shooting epidemic is to go back and use the Granovetterian model—to think of it as a slow-motion, ever-evolving riot, in which each new participant’s action makes sense in reaction to and in combination with those who came before?

The first seven major shooting cases—Loukaitis, Ramsey, Woodham, Carneal, Johnson and Golden, Wurst, and Kinkel—were disconnected and idiosyncratic. Loukaitis was obsessed with Stephen King’s novel “Rage” (written under King’s pseudonym Richard Bachman), about a high-school student who kills his algebra teacher with a handgun. Kip Kinkel, on the morning of his attack, played Wagner’s “Liebestod” aria over and over. Evan Ramsey’s father thought his son was under the influence of the video game Doom. The parents of several of Michael Carneal’s victims sued the makers and distributors of the movie “The Basketball Diaries.”

Then came Columbine. The sociologist Ralph Larkin argues that Harris and Klebold laid down the “cultural script” for the next generation of shooters. They had a Web site. They made home movies starring themselves as hit men. They wrote lengthy manifestos. They recorded their “basement tapes.” Their motivations were spelled out with grandiose specificity: Harris said he wanted to “kick-start a revolution.” Larkin looked at the twelve major school shootings in the United States in the eight years after Columbine, and he found that in eight of those subsequent cases the shooters made explicit reference to Harris and Klebold. Of the eleven school shootings outside the United States between 1999 and 2007, Larkin says six were plainly versions of Columbine; of the eleven cases of thwarted shootings in the same period, Larkin says all were Columbine-inspired.

Along the same lines, the sociologist Nathalie E. Paton has analyzed the online videos created by post-Columbine shooters and found a recurring set of stylized images: a moment where the killer points his gun at the camera, then at his own temple, and then spreads his arms wide with a gun in each hand; the closeup; the wave goodbye at the end. “School shooters explicitly name or represent each other,” she writes. She mentions one who “refers to Cho as a brother-in-arms”; another who “points out that his cultural tastes are like those of ‘Eric and Dylan’ ”; a third who “uses images from the Columbine shooting surveillance camera and devotes several videos to the Columbine killers.” And she notes, “This aspect underlines the fact that the boys actively take part in associating themselves to a group.”

Larkin and Paton are describing the dynamics of Granovetter’s threshold model of group behavior. Luke Woodham, the third in this progression, details in his journal how he and a friend tortured his dog, Sparkle: “I will never forget the howl she made. It sounded almost human. We laughed and hit her hard.” A low-threshold participant like Woodham didn’t need anyone to model his act of violence for him: his imagination was more than up to the task.

But compare him to a post-Columbine shooter like Darion Aguilar, the nineteen-year-old who last year killed two people in a skate shop in a Maryland shopping mall before killing himself. Aguilar wanted to be a chef. He had a passion for plant biology. He was quiet, but not marginalized or bullied. “He was a good person. He always believe[d] in inner peace,” a friend of his told the Washington Post. “He was just a really funny guy.” In the months before the shooting, he went to a doctor, complaining of hearing voices—but his voices were, according to police, “non-specific, non-violent and really not directing him to do anything.” The kid who wants to be a chef and hears “non-specific, non-violent” voices requires a finely elaborated script in order to carry out his attack. That’s what Paton and Larkin mean: the effect of Harris and Klebold’s example was to make it possible for people with far higher thresholds—boys who would ordinarily never think of firing a weapon at their classmates—to join in the riot. Aguilar dressed up like Eric Harris. He used the same weapons as Harris. He wore a backpack like Harris’s. He hid in the changing room of the store until 11:14 a.m.—the precise time when the Columbine incident began—and then came out shooting. A few months later, Aaron Ybarra walked onto the campus of Seattle Pacific University and shot three people, one fatally. Afterward, he told police that he could never have done it without “the guidance of, of Eric Harris and Seung-Hui Cho in my head. . . .Especially, Eric Harris, he was a, oh, man he was a master of all shooters.”

Between Columbine and Aaron Ybarra, the riot changed: it became more and more self-referential, more ritualized, more and more about identification with the school-shooting tradition. Eric Harris wanted to start a revolution. Aguilar and Ybarra wanted to join one. Harris saw himself as a hero. Aguilar and Ybarra were hero-worshippers.

Now imagine that the riot takes a big step further along the progression—to someone with an even higher threshold, for whom the group identification and immersion in the culture of school shooting are even more dominant considerations. That’s John LaDue. “There is one that you probably never heard of like back in 1927 and his name was Arthur Kehoe,” LaDue tells Schroeder. “He killed like forty-five with, like, dynamite and stuff.” Ybarra was a student of Virginia Tech and Columbine. LaDue is a scholar of the genre, who speaks of his influences the way a budding filmmaker might talk about Fellini or Bergman. “The other one was Charles Whitman. I don’t know if you knew who that was. He was who they called the sniper at the Austin Texas University. He was an ex-marine. He got like sixteen, quite impressive.”

LaDue had opinions. He didn’t like the “cowards” who would shoot themselves as soon as the police showed up. He disapproved of Adam Lanza, because he shot kindergartners at Sandy Hook instead of people his own age: “That’s just pathetic. Have some dignity, damn it.” He didn’t like some “shaking schizophrenic dude you’d look at in class and move away from.” He preferred a certain subtlety, “someone you’d say, I never knew he would do something like that. Someone you would not suspect.” One person fit the bill: “My number one idol is Eric Harris. . . . I think I just see myself in him. Like he would be the kind of guy I’d want to be with. Like, if I knew him, I just thought he was cool.”

John LaDue was charged with four counts of attempted murder, two counts of damage to property, and six counts of possession of explosives. It did not take long, however, for the case to run into difficulty. The first problem was that under Minnesota law telling a police officer of your plans to kill someone does not rise to the level of attempted murder, and the most serious of the charges against LaDue were dismissed.

The second problem was more complicated. The prosecution saw someone who wanted to be Eric Harris and plainly assumed that meant he must be like Eric Harris, that there must be a dark heart below LaDue’s benign exterior. But the lesson of the Granovetterian progression, of course, is that this isn’t necessarily true: the longer a riot goes on, the less the people who join it resemble the people who started it. As Granovetter writes, it is a mistake to assume “that if most members of a group make the same behavior decision—to join a riot, for example—we can infer from this that most ended up sharing the same norm or belief about the situation, whether or not they did at the beginning.” And this June, at a hearing where the results of LaDue’s psychiatric evaluation were presented, it became clear just how heterogeneous the riot had become.

Cartoon
“We do a lot of amazing work bringing the arts to people who don’t want the arts.”
Buy the print »

The day’s testimony began with the forensic psychologist Katheryn Cranbrook. She had interviewed LaDue for two and a half hours. She said she had examined many juveniles implicated in serious crimes, and they often had an escalating history of aggression, theft, fighting at school, and other antisocial behaviors. LaDue did not. He had, furthermore, been given the full battery of tests for someone in his position—the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY), the youth version of the Psychopathy Checklists (PCL), and the Risk Sophistication Treatment Inventory (R.S.T.I.)—and the results didn’t raise any red flags. He wasn’t violent or mentally ill. His problem was something far more benign. He was simply a little off. “He has rather odd usage, somewhat overly formal language,” Cranbrook said. “He appears to lack typical relational capacity for family members. . . .He indicates that he would have completed the actions, but he doesn’t demonstrate any concern or empathy for the impact that that could have had on others.” The conclusion of all three of the psychologists who spoke at the hearing was that LaDue had a mild-to-moderate case of autism: he had an autism-spectrum disorder (A.S.D.), or what used to be called Asperger’s syndrome.

The revelation turned the case upside down. The fact that LaDue confessed to Schroeder so readily made him sound cold-blooded. But it turns out that this is typical of people on the autism spectrum in their encounters with police: their literal-mindedness leads them to answer questions directly. LaDue was fascinated—as many teen-age boys are—by guns and explosions. But he didn’t know the acceptable way to express those obsessions. “John has a tendency to say sort of jarring things without much ability to gauge their impact on people,” Mary Kenning, another of the psychologists who examined him, said at the hearing. He spoke without empathy when he discussed killing his family, which made him sound like a psychopath. But the empathy deficits of the people on the autism spectrum—which leaves them socially isolated and vulnerable to predation—are worlds apart from those of the psychopath, whose deficits are put to use in the cause of manipulation and exploitation.

Much of what is so disturbing about LaDue’s exchanges with Schroeder, in fact, is simply his version of the quintessential A.S.D. symptom of “restricted range of interests.” He’s obsessive. He insists on applying logic and analysis to things that most of us know we aren’t supposed to be logical and analytical about. What should he wear? The standard uniform for school shooters is a duster. But it didn’t make sense to wear a duster to school, LaDue explained, “because that’s a bit suspicious.” He’d store it in his locker. Where should the bombs go? Harris and Klebold had chosen the cafeteria. But LaDue felt that was too obvious—and, logistically, placing them in the hallway by the water fountains made more sense. When should he attack? April made the best sense, “because that’s the month that all the really bad tragedies happened like . . . Titanic, Columbine, Oklahoma City bombing, Boston bombing.” And what went wrong at Columbine, anyway? It was supposed to be a bomb attack. So why didn’t the devices planted by Harris and Klebold explode? “They were trying to create a circuit which would ignite some gasoline to hit the propane and cause a BLEVE—which is a boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion . . . which is basically the same thing as say a pipe bomb except with, like, gases,” LaDue patiently explained to Schroeder, before launching into a long technical digression on the relative merits of hydrazine, ammonium perchlorate, Cheddite, nitroglycerin, and flash powder. He was even more scathing about the Boston bombers’ use of pressure-cooker bombs. He thought they made a “crappy design of it.” They used nails and black powder from fireworks. It would have made far more sense to use flash powder and ball bearings, LaDue thought, because “spherical shrapnel” are “superior to nails in damage.” LaDue tells Schroeder that he has two YouTube channels devoted to his work. But anyone who watches the assembled videos expecting to see something macabre will be disappointed. They are home movies of LaDue testing whether tiny fuses will ignite when placed inside a plastic water bottle, or whether he can successfully blow a quarter-size hole in the side of a plastic playground slide. In the world before Columbine, people like LaDue played with chemistry sets in their basements and dreamed of being astronauts.

The idea that people with autism-spectrum disorders can stumble into patterns of serious criminality has a name: counterfeit deviance. It has long been an issue in cases involving A.S.D. teen-agers and child pornography. “They are intellectually intact people, with good computer skills but extraordinary brain-based naïveté, acting in social isolation, compulsively pursuing interests which often unknowingly take them into forbidden territory,” the lawyer Mark J. Mahoney writes in a recent paper. They come upon an online image that appeals to their immature sexuality and don’t understand its social and legal implications. The image might be “marked” for the rest of us, because the child is in some kind of distress. But those kinds of emotional signals are precisely what A.S.D. teen-agers struggle to understand. They start to obsessively collect similar images, not out of some twisted sexual urge but simply because that’s the way their curiosity is configured. What gets these young adults into trouble with the law “is not abnormal sexual desires,” Mahoney writes, “but their tendency to express or pursue normal interests in a manner outside social conventions.”

Was John LaDue’s deviance counterfeit? He told Cranbrook that he would have gone ahead with his plan had he not been stopped, and she believed him. The second of the psychologists to examine him, James Gilbertson, also felt that LaDue’s threat was real: his obsessive preparation had created a powerful momentum toward action. But at every turn his reluctance and ambivalence was apparent: he was the ninety-ninth person in, warily eying the rock. At one point, Schroeder asked him why, if April—as the month of Titanic, Waco, Oklahoma City, and Columbine—was so critical symbolically, he hadn’t attacked the school already. It was April 29th, after all. LaDue, who had been a model of lucidity throughout, was suddenly flustered. “Um, I wanted to do it around April, but I decided not to do it April 19th because I think, no, April 19th wouldn’t work, because that was a Saturday, I think April 14th was it, because, um, I figured I didn’t want to do it April 18th because I figured, because 4/20 was coming up”—4/20 being national marijuana day—“and I figured maybe they would have some dogs there, and find the stuff I had planted in the hallway. . . .But that’s not the case now, cause now it’s May and I just wanted to get it done before school was out.”

He had planned every aspect of the attack meticulously, except for the part where he actually launches the attack. He was uncomfortable. When Schroeder pressed him further, he came up with more excuses. “I had a cooker to buy,” he said, meaning he had yet to purchase the central component of his bombs. And then: “I had to steal a shotgun too.” He had been stalling, prolonging the planning, delaying the act. Then the two of them started talking about ammunition, and LaDue came up with a third excuse: he had bought twenty clips, but “they didn’t fit on the bolt because they were too wide and they had a feeding problem going in there.”

The low-threshold shooters were in the grip of powerful grievances. But LaDue doesn’t seem to have any real grievances. In his notebooks, instead, he seems to spend a good deal of effort trying to manufacture them from scratch. School-shooter protocol called for him to kill his parents. But he likes his parents. “He sees them as good people, loving him, caring about him,” Gilbertson said. “But he has to take their life, according to [his] manifesto, to prove that he’s up to the task, to prove he has no human feelings anymore, that he’s scrubbed out.” After he set off a minor explosion at a local playground, he wrote a letter to the police. “I guess you guys never found it,” he said of the letter. “Did you? I put it in someone’s mailbox and told them to give it to you guys, but they never did.” He seems well aware that his obsession has put him on a dangerous course. “O.K, um, first, I’d like a check from a psychiatrist or something,” he says at one point. And then again: “I just want to find out what’s wrong with me actually”; “I more just want a psychiatric test and that’s really it, though”; “I wanted to ask [for a psychologist] many times, but, obviously, I didn’t want my parents knowing about it, because I wanted to keep it under the radar.” When the three policemen showed up at his storage locker, it must have been a relief. “I figured you guys would be looking for me,” he later told police.

The John LaDue case took a final turn last month. The hearing was at the Waseca County Courthouse, a forbidding Gothic building on the main downtown strip. LaDue, dressed in an orange jumpsuit with “Waseca County Prison” stencilled on the back, was led by two marshals. He had spent the previous seventeen months in a few different juvenile facilities before being transferred, in July, to the local prison. His hair was longer. He wore thick black-framed glasses. He didn’t look at any of the spectators who had come to the hearing. The prosecutor and LaDue’s attorney announced that they had reached a new plea agreement. LaDue would plead guilty to explosives charges in exchange for an extended course of psychiatric treatment and five to ten years of probation. The judge walked him through the particulars of the plea deal, and he answered every question in a deep, oddly adult voice. He was respectful and polite, except when the prosecutor asked him if he understood the difference between an incendiary device and an explosive device. An explosive device, she added, as if she were talking to a child, was something that could “go boom.” When he answered (“Yep”), a brief flare of irritation entered his voice: Are you kidding me?

After the hearing, David LaDue stood on the sidewalk in front of the courthouse and answered questions. He is shorter and stockier than his son, forceful and direct. He said that in order to meet with John the previous evening—and discuss the plea deal—he had to work two sixteen-hour shifts in succession. He was exhausted. He was there, he said, “because I love him, I can’t let go and walk away and forget about it and put it out of my mind.” He wanted to remind the world that his son was human. “He had love,” LaDue said. “He liked affection like anybody else. I saw the expression on his face when he talked to his sister. I saw things in him that he would, certainly at that time, would have denied.” He talked about how difficult it was for men—and for teen-age boys in particular—to admit to vulnerability. “You know, he graduated at the top from Prairie Lake,” he continued, proudly, referring to the juvenile-detention facility where his son had finished his final year of high school. “He got an A in calculus. We were mailed his diploma. . . . There’s no way I could have done that.”
In the day of Eric Harris, we could try to console ourselves with the thought that there was nothing we could do, that no law or intervention or restrictions on guns could make a difference in the face of someone so evil. But the riot has now engulfed the boys who were once content to play with chemistry sets in the basement. The problem is not that there is an endless supply of deeply disturbed young men who are willing to contemplate horrific acts. It’s worse. It’s that young men no longer need to be deeply disturbed to contemplate horrific acts. ♦

Sign up for the daily newsletter: the best of The New Yorker every day