Can we beat the Seahawks?

I liked the chances of the Rams against the Vikings, the Saints, and the Eagles.

The Vikes beat them.

They beat the Saints.

The Eagles game was there for the taking, and the Rams’ inexperience cost them that game.

The Seahawks…well, the Rams nearly beat them in spite of 5 turnovers, including the Gurley fumble that fate could have turned the other way, and the Rams could have gone up big right there. Even so, they had the ball in the end zone as time expired, and could have won. They outplayed Seattle that day, except for 5 turnovers.

Now Seattle is down Chancellor, Sherman, Avril (again), and maybe Wagner. So although it is in Seattle, the Rams ought to have superiority in numbers. Superiority in talent on the field.

Both teams are going to want this game badly, obviously, so it will be an all out battle.

If that Rams lose, I will have to attribute their position in first place more to the mirage of a bad early start by Seattle than their own power as a team. I won’t doubt they are headed in the right direction, but I will see going 1-3 in these Big Games as evidence they don’t belong yet with the Big Boys.

They ought to win this game. Seattle is pretty badly damaged on defense, and the Rams are second in the league in scoring, and have a very good defense that should get the better of the weak Seattle OL. Wilson is a handful, and his receivers are good, and this will be close.

nittany ram wrote:

When the Rams used a 4-3, Quinn, Sims, and Hayes could keep Wilson in the pocket while Donald and Brockers collapsed it. Not sure the current defense will be able to do that as well as they have in past years.

They held Wilson to 198 yards passing in the first game. With just 3 sacks. Wilson was not the reason Seattle won the first game. They won 16 – 10, remember.

The Rams defense is better right now than Seattle’s, and their offense has been better all year long. And their special teams are better. The Rams are better.

The game is in Seattle. Russell Wilson is ridiculously dangerous. Pete Carroll is one of the best. And it is a very disciplined, patient team with a lot of experience in big games.

But the Rams are better.

It’s going to be close. I am going to throw up several times, and probably get insomnia starting Friday night after I submit all my grades and really start thinking about how much money I have on this fucking game. (I will never do this to myself again).

zn wrote:

Zooey wrote:

They held Wilson to 198 yards passing in the first game. With just 3 sacks.

More on that.

In that game they held him to 198 yards passing as you say, and also 16 yards rushing. Outside of that game this year he averages 277 yards a game passing and 39 yards rushing. So his average yards per game is 316 and the Rams held him to 214.

Outside of that game he averages 0.75 INTs a game. The Rams intercepted him twice.

On average he is sacked 2.25 times a game. FWIW the Rams 3 sacks beat that average.

His qb rating outside of that game averages out to 97.1. In that game his qb rating was 76.2.

Outside of that game Seattle averages 24.8 points a game, which would be ranked 8th. 16 points, which is what they of course scored in that game, would be ranked 31st.

All that’s true but Wilson is playing better right now than he has at any point in his career. And the Seahawks added a probowl LT to the lineup since the last times the Rams faced them.

Well its the game of the year for this team. Everything has been pointing to this Game.

And we’ve been here before. Late in the year, heading out to Seattle.

Bradford couldnt do it. I dunno if Goff can.
I can see 20 reasons to pick the rams and 20 reasons to pick the hawks:

Rams 20
Seahawks 20.

w
v

zn wrote:

Why don’t you just move to Russia if you love the Seahawks so much.

Where do you think I’m posting from?

i think robert woods coming back makes a big difference, and seattle’s defense is hurting. plus the team has had some experience playing in hostile road environments. so yeah. i think they got a chance.

so i guess this is where one would say the rubber hits the road?

the master vs the apprentice?

i don’t know. every game for the past 4 weeks seemingly has been so exciting. a loss would be so deflating for sure after making it this far.

Zooey wrote:

zn wrote:

Here’s why the Rams will win Sunday.

Because the universe needs things to go like this.

Seattle beats Philadelphia in Seattle.

Then, Philadelphia beats the Rams in LA.

So next, LA beats Seattle in Seattle.

That’s what the universe wants. Seattle over Phil, Phil over LA, LA over Seattle.

It’s the perfect way for things to be. Do it any other way, and it’s possible to make sense of things. But not this way.

..

I saw an M.C. Escher sketch of that on a cocktail napkin in the Museo del Prado.

================

Luckily M.C. Escher wont be calling plays for the Seahawks.

ok, i dont even know what that means. still, its true.

w
v

wv wrote:

Biggest game in….How long?

w
v

A week.

nittany ram wrote:

wv wrote:

Biggest game in….How long?

w
v

A week.

True in one sense.

But this is for the division.

So another way to put it, when was the last time the Rams had a late season game with the division on the line?

That’s easy, it was 2010, and Seattle won. Though in that year it was a 7-9 division.

Before that, it was 2004, where they couldn’t take the division but were playing to be a wildcard. They had to beat the Jets in the 16th game to make it as a wildcard. They won in OT after coming back in the 4th quarter. They then played Seattle in the playoffs. It was the third time they beat Seattle that year, and 2 of those games were come from behind wins.

Before that there’s no key division game at the end of the year for a long time. The Rams either demolish the division or are the losing team of the 90s.

I am probably forgetting some but the biggest up to 2004 was in 1985, when they beat the Walsh 49ers in the 14th game to end up 11-5 and take 1st in the division over the 10-6 49ers. That was a road game. And in fact a Monday night road game. They came back from being down 20-13 in the 4th quarter to win that one 27-20 (the winning TD being an INT return by Gary Green late in the 4th). This was also Jerry Rice’s break-out game (10 catches, 241 yards). Rams went into that game as 10 point underdogs.

…

dzrams wrote:

Last time they played Seattle, the D performed admirably.

It was the offense that struggled.

And given the struggles of the offense against every good D this year, with the exception of Philly, I think it’s the offense that we should be most concerned about. I don’t believe the O performed well against the Jags, Seattle, or the Vikings. It matters not how many yards they got if they couldn’t score points.

Seattle was a game that they couldn’t score despite moving the ball very well and Seattle’s D has to be given credit for that and the turnovers.

They also struggled to put the ball in the end zone against the Saints and scored lower than their average. That game just kind of highlighted their weakness of scoring TDs rather than FGs when they get in the RZ.

Prior to the Eagles game, I didn’t feel the O had performed really well against any of the top defenses. So I’m not yet convinced that we’re a great offense against the top defenses. Yeah, Seattle is missing players but this is the same D that just held Philly to 10 points.

I guess I’m not scared of Seattle’s offense. We did fine against Wilson the first game. We’ve done very well against him the last several years.

Here’s hoping that both O and D stand up. I just have a better feeling about the D holding Seattle in check than the offense putting up lot’s of points against Seattle’s.

…

I just can’t believe this is not a nationally televised game. The NFL wonders why it has some ratings issues but maybe it’s because crappy teams like the Dolphins are on every other week. On the other hand that may make for a slightly lower key game. Maybe it’s a good thing for the Rams.

zn wrote:

PA Ram wrote:

I just can’t believe this is not a nationally televised game.

I keep thinking it might have been if the Rams had beaten the Eagles.

If they beat the Eagles, there would be LESS on the line in this game.