Rams say, when Hill can play he is the starter

Stupid nimrod has no clue about Quarterbacks. Austin Davis is the best QB on this roster right now and he showed it today.
When Dallas buries the Rams by half time next week may Fisher will see how wrong he is.

Grits

• This reply was modified 10 years, 2 months ago by GreatRamNTheSky.
• This reply was modified 10 years, 2 months ago by zn.
• This reply was modified 10 years, 2 months ago by zn.

I did not have much hope for Davis, and I was vocal about it. Seeing him come through was a pleasant surprise. I think they set up a good game for Davis and he showed good clutch play.

But it was against Tampa, with multiple injuries on their D limiting them. I think they only had 1 original DL starter in the game. So that does not convince me he’s the year-long starter.

A couple of times before now in the last decade, a Rams #3 was forced to play because of injuries. That includes Brock Berlin and Keith Null, who both bombed. Two of them stand out as coming through initially. But IMO only 1 stood up across time as a genuine starter.

First, Bulger in 2002. Warner went out, then the #2 Jamie Martin went out. With Bulger, the Rams went 6-1.

Another was Fitzpatrick in 2005. Bulger went out, then Martin went out again. Martin was injured in the Houston game that year and Fitzpatrick came in, and the Rams got a comeback win out of it. With Fitzpatrick, though, the Rams then went 0-3 after that. I think Linehan was wrong to get rid of him but at the same time, RF couldn’t secure a starting job with one team for a reason. He bounced around for a reason. I don’t event think he’s as good as Hill.

Is Davis a Bulger (starting caliber)? Or a Fitzpatrick (career journeyman)? Or worse (one-game wonder, career back-up)?

The Tampa game does not answer that for me. They set him up to do well, and while he came through, how will he look against NFC west defenses after teams have film on him and can gameplan him?

I understand them going back to Hill.

If Davis continues to come in and do well, then, it will be real interesting next summer, because they will probably add a qb in the draft too, regardless whether Davis keeps coming through, and regardless whether Bradford shows he’s back.

Oh, and, to me, beating Favre’s record in college doesn’t mean much in the era of the college spread. The spread elevates all kinds of qbs into being stats producing machines. Many of those same qbs can’t translate it to the pros. So far Davis has for one game, which is welcome, but it’s not the final say for me.

GreatRamNTheSky wrote:

Getting rid of Fitzpatrick was not advisable either at the time and it seems to me you defended that move then as well.
As it is Fitzpatrick has had a decent career and has actually started for at least 3 different teams and played well.

Austin Davis has shown he can play. Watering it down by saying oh that was against Tampa and not Frisco or Seattle is hogwash. He played who was in front of him and did the job. Hill has not done the job and Davis has demonstrated over and over again he can manage the offense and move the ball and score.

Sorry the “Tampa is not the NFC West” excuse doesn’t wash. Davis has proven more capable when called upon and Hill has proven nothing.

Grits

No I thought dumping Fitzpatrick was a mistake. I don’t think he’s a good qb by any means but it’s better to have experienced #2s.

BTW I didn’t offer any “excuses” and you misread that anyway. I said that for me the Tampa game is by far not enough to judge Davis’s value as an every-down NFL starter…I didn’t say the coaches thought that. I have no more idea what the coaches think than you do. But to pick on your flame there, it’s not “hogwash” to say playing Tampa does not prove he can play against NFC west defenses that have film on him. That’s just true. It DOESN’T prove that. You may believe in him, but that’s all it is; if others don’t find your belief persuasive, that’s just something you have to live with in a civil discussion.

And so I just offered my opinion. I think one game is not enough to conclude what you conclude, though I am not going to flame you for thinking differently than I do. In contrast to you, I fully understand the Hill decision and back it–so far anyway. That just means we have different opinions, which is always the basis for good discussion. At the end of the day, though, that’s all it means. You and I differ on our opinions of this. That’s all.

And others will chime in too. They may differ from both of us. Which is fine. That’s the whole point of discussion on this board–to get as many views as possible aired, hash em out while being civil about it, and at the end of the week, root together for the team to win.

Davis doesn’t have enough arm strength for me. I can’t see him as a long term answer at starter, even though he played a hell of a game Sunday.