Horns pierce the Seahawks: Post-game thread

[wv]

IN Seattle? Are you kidding me?

w
v

• This topic was modified 8 years, 10 months ago by wv.

[NERam]

wv wrote:

IN Seattle? Are you kidding me?

w
v

Barnes is the new Massey… Clutch.

Seattle D???

Pfft. I twerk in their general direction.

[— X —]

Barnes is the new Massey… Clutch.

Sacrilege.

You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr Seuss

[wv]

NERam wrote:

wv wrote:

IN Seattle? Are you kidding me?

w
v

Barnes is the new Massey… Clutch.

Well if Barnes is the New-Massey
then who is William Hayes ?

w
v

[Agamemnon]

Even Hekker got a Personal Foul. 😉

Agamemnon

[zn]

wv wrote:

IN Seattle?

First time since 2004

[Eternal Ramnation]

I think we’re fine at Center when we get starters back. Barnes may not be the most gifted Center but he has the hustle and really has helped out calling the protections at the line, IOW he’s smart and durable . When the OG’s have experience and are coached up to give Barnes help Gurley and Tavon will be a nightmare. Cool die hard chat for this one started out with me a ZN and then -X- and Ag with their advancedness (well zn was advanced too maybe I’m just slow?) Anyways I had fun , thanks fellas ! Good to see wv on the chat IR showed up and it was over seaHags had no chance almost feel sorry for 49ers almost hehehehe.The defense considering how many were out played lights out,some stupid mistakes but we got the win!

[nittany ram]

Well, technically this counts as a win but it doesn’t feel like one. It was way too close. Seattle probably can’t believe how close they were to pulling off the upset of the century. This probably made their season.

The Rams on the other hand need to take a long hard look in the mirror and try to figure out who they are. They need to ask themselves if they want to be the kind of team that plays down to the level of their competition or do they finally want to be the kind of team that plays up to its ability. I’m sick and tired of the lackadaisical attitude that has plagued this team since Massey’s departure.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 10 months ago by nittany ram.

[PA Ram]

I have been sick as a dog today–been waking up off and on to check the score and apparently the Rams won this thing? Maybe that’s the key–I should try to be sick more often? Hey–for the team. Anyway–nice win. Now–it’s back to bed and my friend Bucky–the green vomit bucket.

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick

[NERam]

— X — wrote:

Barnes is the new Massey… Clutch.

Sacrilege.

I know. Sorry. It seems that the longer they play losing seasons, the quicker I am at latching onto any perceived savior. Today it was Barnes and his 2 fumble recoveries…

wv wrote:

NERam wrote:

wv wrote:

IN Seattle? Are you kidding me?

w
v

Barnes is the new Massey… Clutch.

Well if Barnes is the New-Massey
then who is William Hayes ?

w
v

I guess, seeing as how he turned CenturyLink Field into a quiet, churchlike arena, perhaps Parson Hayes? Or Pastor Hayes? Or Deac…

no no no, Parson or Pastor. Take yer pick.

[InvaderRam]

not trying to be a wet blanket, but this game meant more to the rams than the seahawks. seahawks had no chance at the division and had already secured their playoff spot. seahawks were looking past this game.

would i rather be swept by a divisional rival and make the playoffs or would i rather sweep a division rival and hopefully not have a losing record?

hmmm… still don’t feel like these rams get it.

[zn]

InvaderRam wrote:

not trying to be a wet blanket, but this game meant more to the rams than the seahawks. seahawks had no chance at the division and had already secured their playoff spot. seahawks were looking past this game.

would i rather be swept by a divisional rival and make the playoffs or would i rather sweep a division rival and hopefully not have a losing record?

hmmm… still don’t feel like these rams get it.

On the other hand, if they start Keenum from game 1 I give them 3-4 more wins.

Pittsburgh, Minnesota, Baltimore (because it wouldn’t be his 1st start), and maybe even Green Bay.

[— X —]

InvaderRam wrote:

not trying to be a wet blanket, but this game meant more to the rams than the seahawks. seahawks had no chance at the division and had already secured their playoff spot. seahawks were looking past this game.

would i rather be swept by a divisional rival and make the playoffs or would i rather sweep a division rival and hopefully not have a losing record?

hmmm… still don’t feel like these rams get it.

I don’t know about all that. They drop from 5th seed to 6th seed if the Vikings win again next week. And what kind of playoff team takes another team for granted? You’d think they’d want all the momentum going into the playoffs that they could get, and to keep their streak alive. There was also mention that the seahawks’ locker room was very somber. As if they just lost a playoff game. So that leads me to believe that they wanted this one bad.

You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr Seuss

[Agamemnon]

InvaderRam wrote:

not trying to be a wet blanket, but this game meant more to the rams than the seahawks. seahawks had no chance at the division and had already secured their playoff spot. seahawks were looking past this game.

would i rather be swept by a divisional rival and make the playoffs or would i rather sweep a division rival and hopefully not have a losing record?

hmmm… still don’t feel like these rams get it.

Then why was Wilson in there risking injury after the unicorn was singing?

Agamemnon

[InvaderRam]

— X — wrote:

InvaderRam wrote:

not trying to be a wet blanket, but this game meant more to the rams than the seahawks. seahawks had no chance at the division and had already secured their playoff spot. seahawks were looking past this game.

would i rather be swept by a divisional rival and make the playoffs or would i rather sweep a division rival and hopefully not have a losing record?

hmmm… still don’t feel like these rams get it.

I don’t know about all that. They drop from 5th seed to 6th seed if the Vikings win again next week. And what kind of playoff team takes another team for granted? You’d think they’d want all the momentum going into the playoffs that they could get, and to keep their streak alive. There was also mention that the seahawks’ locker room was very somber. As if they just lost a playoff game. So that leads me to believe that they wanted this one bad.

they can talk about how much the game meant to them. how badly they wanted it. but at the end of the day the rams’ season ends next week. again. the seahawks are going on to bigger and better things. and whether they won or lost. it didn’t make one bit of difference in terms of making the playoffs or to who they face in the playoffs. yeah. momentum could help propel them to another superbowl berth, but that team has been there done that. this rams team can hang its hat on a lot of promise and talk but little else.

and i don’t put it all on the foles vs keenum. i don’t know that keenum would have been the difference of 3 or 4 games.

[InvaderRam]

Agamemnon wrote:

InvaderRam wrote:

not trying to be a wet blanket, but this game meant more to the rams than the seahawks. seahawks had no chance at the division and had already secured their playoff spot. seahawks were looking past this game.

would i rather be swept by a divisional rival and make the playoffs or would i rather sweep a division rival and hopefully not have a losing record?

hmmm… still don’t feel like these rams get it.

Then why was Wilson in there risking injury after the unicorn was singing?

he needed the reps…

ha!

[zn]

You know for all this talk about how tough a game Seattle is, Rams have won 3 of the last 4 against them. If you go back to 2012, the Rams are 4-4 against Seattle. That includes losing 1 home game and winning 3, then winning 1 away game and losing 3. Since Fisher came to the Rams, Seattle’s record in St. Louis (1-3) is the same as the Rams record in Seattle (1-3).

[Eternal Ramnation]

zn wrote:

You know for all this talk about how tough a game Seattle is, Rams have won 3 of the last 4 against them. If you go back to 2012, the Rams are 4-4 against Seattle. That includes losing 1 home game and winning 3, then winning 1 away game and losing 3. Since Fisher came to the Rams, Seattle’s record in St. Louis (1-3) is the same as the Rams record in Seattle (1-3).

And the game the Rams lost in St.louis was much closer than today’s game (empty backfield and put it on Clemmons shoulders)

[Agamemnon]

Somebody needs to go back and break it down, but if feels like the best effort by the OL this year.

Agamemnon

[InvaderRam]

all negativity aside i am encouraged by the reports on the oline. didn’t see the whole game but hopefully this continues into next week. get some momentum going into the offseason.

[wv]

InvaderRam wrote:

all negativity aside i am encouraged by the reports on the oline…

Voltaire-ram said football is a shipwreck
but you have to sing in the life-boats.

He didn’t say what song though.
Thats where it gets confusing.

Anyway. Unexpected road win for a banged-up
team.

Does the next game matter? Does 8-8
mean anything?

w
v

[zn]

wv wrote:

Does 8-8
mean anything?

The record stopped meaning anything after the Foles meltdown and the losing streak.

But. WINS mean something.

What do they mean? Well speaking only for myself, I like them.

I am not willing to get into a drawn out herd-style debate about whether I should like them. If someone like invader doesn’t because 8-8 isn;t good enough, I will raise my glass to him and nod because I get that. It’s just not how I feel though.

I like that the Rams were part of Upset Sunday this month. I like the fact that they took it to Seattle on the road. I like that they won in spite of not having Gaines, McDonald, Barron, Ogletree, and Quinn.

So you forgot to ask the REAL question. The really important question.

“What did this win mean to zn.”

It meant a lot. It was fun. Thanks for asking.

.

[wv]

zn wrote:

wv wrote:

Does 8-8
mean anything?

The record stopped meaning anything after the Foles meltdown and the losing streak.

But. WINS mean something.

What do they mean? Well speaking only for myself, I like them.

I am not willing to get into a drawn out herd-style debate about whether I should like them. If someone like invader doesn’t because 8-8 isn;t good enough, I will raise my glass to him and nod because I get that. It’s just not how I feel though.

I like that the Rams were part of Upset Sunday this month. I like the fact that they took it to Seattle on the road. I like that they won in spite of not having Gaines, McDonald, Barron, Ogletree, and Quinn.

So you forgot to ask the REAL question. The really important question.

“What did this win mean to zn.”

It meant a lot. It was fun. Thanks for asking.

.

Ok, but what song are you going to sing
in the lifeboat?

w
v

[zn]

wv wrote:

Ok, but what song are you going to sing
in the lifeboat?

w
v

Yellow Submarine.

[bnw]

NERam wrote:

Pfft. I twerk in their general direction.

I love it.

The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

Sprinkles are for winners.

[— X —]

wv wrote:

Voltaire-ram said football is a shipwreck
but you have to sing in the life-boats.

He didn’t say what song though.
Thats where it gets confusing.

Anyway. Unexpected road win for a banged-up
team.

Does the next game matter? Does 8-8
mean anything?

w
v

It means much less than 14-2, and much more than 2-14. But like zn, it means a lot to me. There’s a lot of hemming and hawing (mostly hawing) about the Rams losing draft position with every “meaningless win” they rack up, but I don’t underestimate the importance of finishing the season on a win streak. You can carry that over to the next season like Carolina did this year. Last year started 3-8-1 before reeling off 4 straight and capped it off with a playoff win to advance to the division round. Then they followed that up with 14 straight wins this year.

This team needs to learn how to win and it needs to get used to winning. You don’t do that by losing games and winning in the draft. They award no trophies for good drafting.

You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr Seuss

[Herzog]

I’m with you all. The foundation of “belief” is being formed right now.

So long as we don’t have any major changes. Every year, that end of year winning streak is followed by a major shift in scheme that screws us. If we can keep our coordinaters the same, and most of the parts the same, this team should be really good.

[Zooey]

Here is something I like. From http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25429380/man-loses-over-150k-after-betting-on-the-seahawks-to-beat-the-rams

Seahawks coach Pete Carroll was pretty disappointed after his team lost to the Rams on Sunday, but it’s probably safe to say that Carroll wasn’t quite as disappointed as the guy who lost over $150,000 after the Rams pulled off the 23-17 upset over Seattle.

According to ESPN.com, a high-roller walked into the Flamingo in Las Vegas and put $165,000 down on the Seahawks to beat the Rams straight-up.

The Seahawks were 12.5 point favorites in the game, so a $165,000 bet on Seattle to win wasn’t going to pay $165,000, it was only going to pay $15,000.

A Seahawks win was paying -1100, which means you’d have to bet $1100 to win $100. To the bettor, the Seahawks clearly seemed like a lock, which is why he was willing to put so much money down for such a small payout. Before Sunday, the Rams hadn’t won a regular season game in Seattle since 2004.

“This was a day you want to forget.”

That was Pete Carroll’s quote after the game, but I’m guessing our high-roller was thinking the same thing after Seattle’s loss.

Anyway, that’s this week’s lesson on why you should never gamble.

On the other hand, maybe it’s OK to dabble, after all. Case in point: a woman who admittedly knew nothing about gambling won $100,000 by making just a $5 bet on the NFL last week.

[InvaderRam]

don’t get me wrong. the wins mean a lot to me. i just got a little bit annoyed watching long and ogletree engaging the fans. when in reality this win doesn’t mean AS much when you realize the seahawks are making the playoffs and the rams are not. i really wonder if this team realizes that. they should be pissed about how this season ended injuries or not. i wonder if they’re content with being mediocre every year.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 10 months ago by InvaderRam.

[Dak]

I loved it.

I can’t get enough of the Rams dominating the Seahawks. The Rams are in their heads now. They have no psychological advantage against the Rams heading into next year. To me, this win is about the Rams vs. the Seahawks. And, it’s oh so nice to see it go down like this. Domination in the trenches. Out-physicaling the physical ‘Hawks. We’re in their domes. No doubt. And, yes, the Seahawks wanted to win just as badly. This is THEIR turf. This is the home of the 12th Man. Nobody else wins here. They can’t let St. Louis, which has been successful upsetting Seattle in STL, come in there and win.

Yet, they did. And, that meant something to the Seahawks.

It also means that the Rams CAN score against a good team in difficult situations. This was not a great offensive effort, but it was an effective one. That started with the O-line, which gives me hope for next year.

Now, what we don’t know is if the Rams can win when there’s something truly on the line. They haven’t done that, yet. That needs to come next year. Has to. Must. No excuses. ABSOLUTELY no excuses next year. The Rams should have depth at key positions, including the O-line. They should have a good game manager QB, at the least. And, they should have a great D again.

[Author]

Posts