Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 571 through 600 (of 4,301 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 99 vs 2022 #136473
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    It’s just memory, so I won’t plant a flag in the ground there. But I remember thinking the 1999 Rams were unstoppable on offense, and pretty good on D as well. They were #6 in the league, I believe. But, they didn’t live up to that dominance in the playoffs, and barely made it through.

    The Rams this season had stretches of dominance, especially early on, but I think the pundits wrote them off at several points a long the way. They seem to have played better in the playoffs than in the regular season, if we adjust for levels of competition.

    IMO, the best Rams team in recent times was the 2001 Rams. They were better on both sides of the ball than the 1999 version. But they couldn’t get it done in the Super Bowl, and, if memory serves, weren’t awesome in the playoffs before that, either.

    Strange, too, the way memory works. Cuz I think several Rams teams in the late 1960s, thru the 1980s, were even more dominant, especially on D, than this year’s squad, but they were One and Done in the playoffs all too frequently. Used to break this once young fan’s heart.

    in reply to: Rams win #136440
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    WV,

    I’m seeing some media pundits this morning highlight the Pass Interference call on the Bengals, while ignoring the face-mask that led to the Cincy TD. I may be alone on this, but the replays of the one that was called look like the defender did get there too soon. If it had just been the “hold” before that, I would have said it’s a ticky-tack call, but I think the defender also bumped the receiver enough before he swatted down the pass to make a difference. So, again, it wasn’t the grabbing early on, IMO, but the significant bump right before he swats down the pass. Regardless, it was a tough call.

    In general, though, the thing I think the NFL really needs to get right is calling the helmet to helmet stuff. That’s just deadly, and it needs to stop.

    Are receivers now the most likely targets? It seemed like it used to be running backs. But Kupp, for instance, gets hit in the head a lot, and the non-call against OBJ a coupla weeks back looked really, really ugly.

    If it were up to me, I’d throw the flag, give the player ONE warning. A second time, in that game or any other, he’s out of there. A third time, and he’s done for the season.

    in reply to: Rams win #136436
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Did anyone else have the feeling that this was not Akers’ day, and the Rams needed to play Henderson and Michel instead? I was yelling at the screen to take him out. Have the feeling that his long battle with his injury, and his miraculous comeback, caught up to him. He just didn’t seem to have any juice left. Gutsy, gutsy guy. But he looked off.

    Of course, the Bengals were shutting down the run in general, like the Niners, but I think Henderson and Michel gave the Rams a better chance.

    in reply to: Rams win #136435
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    I can’t remember the exact game. But early in his career, AD tackled the running back on a play-action fake, and then tackled the QB who kept the ball. At the time, I was laughing and yelling at the screen that he just did the impossible. And if memory serves, the Rams had Quinn at the time who was breaking the laws of physics too. I seriously wanted to see those two stay with the Rams forever.

    Any word on OBJ’s injury?

    in reply to: Rams win #136433
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Oh, and Kupp. He took the team on his back, just like AD and Stafford. Unworldly player.

    in reply to: Rams win #136432
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Obviously, I’m too close to the game to be objective. So, I wonder how football fans who weren’t fans of either team saw it.

    My guess is they loved it — as a great football game. As a Rams fan since 1966, however, it was too close for comfort for me.

    ;>)

    But it had a host of great moments, with a lot of surprises. Loved seeing Hopkins step up, for instance, and I think the Rams have something there. Jones, at linebacker: They don’t have to search for that position any more. Stafford improved throughout the playoffs, but made that one goof. He’s still the guy who can bring them back to another one next year, and there is no tougher QB.

    A great win, and a lot of fun to watch. I really hope AD comes back!

    Anyway, congrats to them and to all of us!!

     

    in reply to: Ag’s last post was Jan 13, 2021 #136292
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    I’m not posting as much these days, do didn’t realize he had been missing. I second the hopes of him being in good health.

    in reply to: Rams cap situation for 2022 #136213
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Interesting idea, WV.

    Never thought of that. He may want to reappear just for a playoff run.

    In the NBA, some of the older stars do that, but without leaving the team. They borrowed a term from baseball, “pitch count,” and apply that to their elder statesmen. But I don’t recall the NFL having any such “program” for their stars. So it would have to be a weddle bit like the Rams situation at DB.

    Of course, if they had drafted at the freakin position in recent years, perhaps they wouldn’t need to sweat the future.

    :>)

     

    in reply to: Rams cap situation for 2022 #136196
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    From this list:

    • WR Odell Beckham Jr.
      • C Brian Allen
      • RG Austin Corbett
      • OLB Von Miller
      • CB Darious Williams
      • S Eric Weddle

    I think they can most easily afford to let the last two go. Weddle will most likely re-retire anyway.

    Rochell and Ramsey will make for a very strong duo, with good size, and more athleticism than the Ramsey/Williams pairing.

    But, unless they know they can upgrade their O-line from outside the team, they better work hard to bring back Allen, Corbett, and Noteboom. Still draft for those spots. But I don’t think they can keep letting guys leave.

    If they win Sunday, especially, they’re gonna be a prime destination for a lot of other players, including those perhaps thought of as over-the-hill. The Rams scouts and staff have a pretty good record of hitting on that type . . .

    . . . A topic that isn’t getting as much attention as it should: they keep losing coaches and staff, too. How long before that takes its toll?

    Man, I worry too much!

     

    ;>)

     

    in reply to: building the superbowl Rams #136178
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    The suggestion of trading Van Jefferson wasn’t because of cap issues. He’s likely on a very team-friendly contract for two more years. It was the potential of needed draft picks, and the crowded nature of the wide receiver room, if they bring back both OBJ and Woods.

    I’m betting they wouldn’t do as I suggest, and that Woods may actually be the guy they let go, if OBJ stays. Though it’s probably most likely they can’t re-sign the latter, unfortunately.

    Too early prediction for that room next season: Kupp, Woods, Jefferson, Skowronek, and Tutu — plus rookie, if they keep six.

    (I have no real idea where they’ll put Harris. Depends on his recovery, success at adding weight, blocking, etc.)

    in reply to: building the superbowl Rams #136169
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    I read somewhere that the Rams have $39 million in dead money coming off the books next year for Goff, Gurley, & 3 other guys. I don’t remember who. So OBJ and Miller can probably fit – if that’s what everybody actually wants to do.

     

    I think you’re correct, Zooey. But I thought they were in cap hell even given the fall-off of dead money. Who was it from the old site, Firecap? Wasn’t he the guy who really had a handle on all of that?

    Anyway, if I had to choose between just the two guys, I’d re-sign OBJ. Would love to have them both. But if it’s a choice, I take the wideout. Miller will be 33. He’s played really good football, but he’s on the downside of his career, and I think OBJ has several strong years ahead of him.

    Woods is one of my favorite Rams, and I don’t want to see him go, so if they have to make room, I’d trade Van. He also might be the guy other teams seek, given his age. Woods and OBJ will be 30, I think. Apparently, in recent years, that age seems to be a downturn year for receivers in the current incarnation of the NFL. Don’t know why, exactly, but one of several Rams bloggers came up with some Next Gen stuff and found a big fall-off for receivers starting around that age. I get that stuff from the Apple News aggregate when I doom scroll.

    ;>)

    Really want them to prioritize SJD and OBJ. Hope I’m wrong about the other stuff, about the cap being so tight, but if it is, I really want the Rams to have a rotation next year of Gaines, SJD, Donald, Brown, Hoecht, plus rookie. In the wideout room, Kupp, OBJ, Woods, Skowronek, Tutu, or rookie. That’s an amazing receiver room. About the only thing it lacks is a tree who’s really fast. A Metcalf kind of guy.

    Anyway, as mentioned, looking forward to the splurge on Sunday. May just break the bank, for food and beverages. Get exotic with both, perhaps. Leave it all on the field, to the degree we fans can.

    Hope all is well.

    in reply to: building the superbowl Rams #136166
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    When the Rams built around a handful of A+ stars (Donald, Ramsey, Stafford, Kupp, Whitworth) it was legit to ask if that was enough. The answer was simple–if they could stock the team with decent to good players around the stars and do it cheaply, the fact that they dedicated a huge proportion of their cap to a handful of players is completely justifiable. And, it’s what happened. Next year for example it looks like the Rams starting safeties will be Fuller and Scott, and that will be about as good a tandem as they’ve had for years. It cost them 1 6th round and 1 7th round pick.

     

    I agree with all of that. I like the Scott/Fuller tandem too. A lot. Excellent picks.

    But I’m worried that cap issues will cull the talent once again. Can the Rams afford to re-sign SJD, for example? He was a gem of a pick, and has a strong combination of athleticism, size, and want-to, with the latter likely (again) at least partially the result of being next to AD, etc. Can they afford to re-sign Miller or OBJ? And the O-line? How will they make up for the loss at LT? They might not be able to re-sign Noteboom either.

    Have never been a cap expert, but it doesn’t look good on those fronts. IMO, that’s due to being far too quick to extend Goff, Gurley, and a few others, before they had to. And that kind of thing doesn’t just hurt them in retaining their front tier guys. It hurts depth.

    Anyway, I’m being too negative in a Super Bowl week. Gotta enjoy this now and worry about next season — next season. This week is for splurging, celebration, once in a blue moon stuff.

    in reply to: building the superbowl Rams #136150
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    “I don’t know if people who can’t (do it) stick out (so much as) they’re gonna *melt*” Probly dont wanna put a sign that says ‘that’ on a wall. w v

    What Snead says does echo a Rams thing. What do they look for when drafting players? Smarts is one. And another is just plain love of the game. (That’s not all but those 2 are big.) You know what the Rams 3 all-time worst high offensive line draft picks have in common? Questionable love of the game. Barron, Smith, Robinson.

    Barron, Smith, and Robinson had other things in common. They were, for the line, exceptional athletes. Off the charts, elite. Though Robinson, unlike Barron and Smith, also had crazy size. They all had the physical foundation for perennial dominance.

    My first (amateur GM) instinct is to go for great athletes above all other traits, and I think “athleticism” is the most easily measured, known, observable. So-called intangibles are far, far tougher for scouts and staff to see, and usually all too subjectively assessed. They’re often hidden during the draft process, or in those salad days, and may only come to the fore later. Who knows why? For instance, I highly doubt the Rams knew what they were getting in Aaron Donald along those lines, but they knew he was freakish, athletically. He’s a generational player primarily because he merges fanatical drive, discipline, and hunger with that freakish athleticism, and that combo just doesn’t happen very often. Deacon Jones is another case in point, though team after team passed him over in the draft, if memory serves. He made the scouts look seriously stupid pretty quickly.

    To make a long story shorter, what the Rams have is at least two special players with freakish athleticism and fanatical love of the game: Donald and Ramsey. They have another with lesser athleticism but the same kinds of intangibles: Kupp. Having those players creates more of the same. Sparks unhidden “intangibles” in other players that even the scouts and staff never knew were there — primarily cuz the players didn’t know they had it in them, either.

    Gaines seems to be benefiting tremendously from that snow-ball effect. There are obviously many others.

    So, if I’m the GM/coach/staff, I keep trying to find great athletes who other teams may think are just not living up to their abilities, get them in the room with an expanding bunch of ADs, Kupps, and Ramseys, and hope the light goes on. Well, I do more than just hope. I work as hard as I can to extend and elevate that environment, from the bottom up. I also try for the guys I know already love the game but may not have elite athleticism, and train ’em up to the degree possible.

    Coach up, train up, psych up, etc. Love of the game, want-to off the charts, discipline the mind and body, and we’re all in this together, etc.

    in reply to: building the superbowl Rams #136131
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    I still can’t forgive them for drafting Tutu in the 2nd round. Again, he’s fast, he’s very tough for his size, but it was . . . . one of the most baffling picks in Rams history . . . right up there with Trung.

    Tiny, speedy receivers tend to be available much later, even as UDFAs, if that was the criterion. But you almost never find receivers with size/speed/hands/physicality boxes checked late. Speedy smurfs — you can. I would have taken Creed Humphreys instead.

    I think they can do their “all in now” strategy and make better draft picks when they have them. I also think they tend to dump players too quickly and for too little. Example Kenny Young, who was actually their best linebacker when they traded him. He’d help them right now, I’d bet.

    Anyway . . . they’ve made this route work, obviously, and I’m a fan of their drive and courage to go against the grain. But there are some tweaks to it all I wish they’d make . . . and they’re going to run into cap issues all too soon.

    In short, I want what may be impossible: Win now and build for the future. But I’ll settle for the former with a little more emphasis on the latter than is the Rams current MO.

    in reply to: Raheem Morris #136130
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Unless memory doesn’t serve, Staley’s defense started off slowly too. Took a few weeks before it was really clicking. Same with RM’s. And he inherited more player turnover, I think.

    Hope he gets a shot at HC.

    And, my mercenary self has another reason for wanting this, aside from social justice issues. The Rams get much needed draft picks when minority coaches make that leap. It’s a classic win/win.

    Now, what I’m not so sure of, is if it’s just any promotion, or if it has to be to HC or GM. As in, if the Rams lose their excellent DB coach, which is likely, and he becomes a DC, it’s a promotion. But I’m thinking the Rams don’t get a draft pick for that. It’s not a big enough move, apparently, under the rules, etc.

    ???

    Regardless, that’s a good way to build up that pipeline. Moving up the chain, etc.

    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    It’s already been mentioned, of course. But anyone else worried about the Bengals receivers and the match-ups with our DBs?

    I am. They may be the best trio the Rams have faced all year, and Burrows is exceptionally accurate.

    Don’t know if the Rams have considered this, but it might be more effective to play Scott as another corner, rather than at safety. He’s their best (DB) athlete, after Ramsey, and has decent size. Not so confident in Williams or Deayon going up against the tall trees on the Bengals. Ramsey can handle Chase, but after that?

     

    Overall, I like the Rams chances, but I don’t think this is a lock, by any means. It’s likely going to come down to Stafford playing mistake-free, and the Rams D getting to Burrow early and often. The latter can not let Burrow get comfortable in the pocket.

    Oh, and the Rams need to run the ball.

    in reply to: Washington NFL team new name coming? #136045
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Obviously, there are much, much bigger issues to deal with than a NFL team name . . . but I would think Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale and The Testaments, plus the Hulu series, would have soured them on the one they chose.

    I can’t help but see the word in a different light because of those works. And, given the Washington’s recent range of issues about its team culture?

    Oh, well. The change was necessary. But they could have done better.

    in reply to: our reactions to the NFC title game #135883
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Going in, I thought the Rams had this. But I was in a hopeless land later on, thinking the Niners curse was still in effect. Rams made mistakes and let the game get away from them. But they wouldn’t quit, and reversed the narrative. They reversed the sense that the Niners were the team of destiny this year, albeit via their late-in-the-season wins.

    Very proud of this team. Whether it was “win one for AD,” or however they managed to dig deep and deeper, they earned this win. Not through “finesse,” but grit.

    Have no idea who should get the game ball, but I do think OBJ came up huge, and, surprisingly, Blanton. Of course, the D did what it needed to do, when it needed to do it, and I think it gets some reinforcements for the Super Bowl, like SJD.

    Great win, in a very tough game.

    in reply to: setting up the NFC title game #135690
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Agree, Zooey. They did play really good football. Short fields and all.

    in reply to: setting up the NFC title game #135677
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    It goes without saying that the Rams can’t turn over the football against the Niners. They can’t. And, at the same time, they need to cause the Niners to turn the ball over. The Rams’ D obviously has the personnel for that.

    Too many people are calling the Niners the Team of Destiny, and that kind of fiction can take hold of a squad and spur them on. The Rams can not play into those fictions.

    Shocking turnover by Kupp. I don’t worry about him for Sunday. But they need to work with Akers all this week. Have him walk everywhere with the football, morning, noon, and night, etc.

    Observation from the last game, and the season overall. I think Jefferson is the best #3 in football, and he needs to be used more. Unfortunately, there aren’t enough footballs to go around. And, while it’s not likely the Rams can afford to keep OBJ and Miller, if I have to choose between the two, I go with OBJ. He’s been exceptionally good, and will give the Rams easily the best top four receivers of any team.

    Stafford needs to play next Sunday like he’s played the last two weekends. That’s the guy they hope they had traded for.

    One regret from the weekend: I didn’t watch the other games, and it sounds like this may have been the greatest playoff weekend in NFL history.

    in reply to: Rams signing (gulp) Weddell #135408
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Isn’t this a weddle bit too late in the season for such a signing?

    in reply to: Playoff Schedule: Monday Night Game? #135370
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Also, I think their window is still open for a couple more
    years or so. I just think what they need to do is simply
    add a couple god-dam OLineman. Instead of tutus.

    w
    v

    It was crazy not to take Creed Humphries in the last draft. Or pretty much any of the O-line guys rated in that range. Tiny receivers with speed, who likely won’t be higher on the depth chart than #4? Um, smart front offices don’t do that.

    The Rams are a bit of an enigma, aren’t they? It seems like they make some really inspired moves, bringing in key players like Ramsey, for instance. But then botch draft picks and get far too clever with other trades. They seem like gambling addicts at times. Just can’t help but stay at the tables too long.

    I still like their chances. But they should be even better than they are.

    in reply to: our reactions to the 9ers game #135337
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Strange reaction to the game for me. They actually won the division tonight, and have a home game next week in the playoffs, but I’m still bummed out.

    Didn’t like the way they played — at least from the end of the first half on. Couple of great individual efforts, like Kupp’s, and Ramsey’s, but not much beyond that. The O-line was terrible. Couldn’t open holes or protect Stafford, and he didn’t play well either.

    The D let the Niners push them around — again. If they play like this next week, the Cardinals will crush them.

    Beating that poor dead horse, but I don’t think Stafford has lived up to expectations, and I’d bet that Goff would have won as many games. I’d rather the Rams had kept him, and their draft picks, and if they just couldn’t live with another year of Goff after this season, use a First Rounder on a QB. That would have been my preference. Oh, well.

    Gotta be the weirdest feeling evah after the Rams win a division title.

    in reply to: Don’t Look Up #135271
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    One major problem with naming capitalism as the issue — and it is — is that most people don’t know what the word means..

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

    Yup. Absolutely. And of course, that is not an accident.

    Capitalism dums the population down ‘politically.’

    It would have to, in order to survive. So it does.

    One of the 5 gazillion reasons, we are totally F’d.

    w
    v

    That dumbing down part. I think it’s fair to say it’s the first economic system in world history with its own, dedicated, self-renewing PR wing. And that PR wing “colonizes” the mind, along with the body, and the macro and micro, domestically and overseas. It’s also fair to say it’s the first economic system in world history with its own “imperialist” laws of motion, baked in. It doesn’t require Napoleons in the political or royal realm for this to keep going; it colonizes everything with or without them — forcing that upon “the state,” or bypassing it if need be.

    Of course, it would rather “the state” pay for all or most of that, and it mostly does in the modern era. But it doesn’t require endless wars to unify the people any longer, as Hegel said the Greek State did. Before, during, and after wars it keeps on chugging, imperialistically.

    A lot more to it, of course, as far as the way it “naturalizes” the sense that it’s always been our one and only system, and nothing else can or should replace it. But, again, there has never been another mode of production with this kind of appalling stranglehold on hearts and minds . . . and, given its history of atrocity and exploitation, and it’s ongoing inability to “deliver the goods” to more than a small percentage of the populace, plus its planet-killing effects . . . Well, it’s just insane that the world hasn’t cast off its chains by now.

    In-sane.

    in reply to: Don’t Look Up #135266
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    An analogy I often use, and think is pretty good, at least gets some to think a bit about it:

    1. You build custom chairs with your own two hands. You have no employees. You do everything yourself, from the building to the selling. You are not a capitalist, and your business isn’t a capitalist business.

    2. You hire a dozen workers to build those chairs for you. They generate a surplus value that you appropriate yourself as if you did all the work. You are a capitalist and your business is a capitalist business.

    There are other keys, of course. The main reason why capitalism is so deadly when it comes to the earth is that it must continuously grow or die. It must constantly extend its reach into newer and newer markets, and/or turn the vanishing Commons into private profit. All of that creates yet another pressurized feedback loop.

    Capitalism’s main purpose is to radically increase and concentrate capital at the top of the pyramid (it creates), which means it can’t “conserve” resources, or live within the finite limits of any natural system. It must do this now, today, and “mortgage the future” like so many Sneads run amok, endlessly.

    It also has no “democratic” checks on its power. If the economy ever becomes democratic, then it is no longer “capitalist.” Etc.

    In short, we could scale up the first example, via fully democratic workplaces, shared fruits and cooperative economics, linked across the nation and the world, and prevent the apocalypse. But as long as we have the capitalist system, that is impossible. We humans are not likely to make it through the 22nd century.

    in reply to: Don’t Look Up #135265
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    One major problem with naming capitalism as the issue — and it is — is that most people don’t know what the word means. I’ve had a gazillion conversations about that in the real world and online, and it’s pretty clear that the word has morphed into far too broad a sense of economics to be easily discussed.

    Especially with those on the right and the center. Most just see it as a synonym for trade, commerce, and business more broadly, and all too many think of it as something that has always existed . . . not as something with an actual beginning, middle, late period and hopefully an end.

    In short, when I espouse anticapitalism and alternatives to capitalism, all too many people immediately assume I’m against all forms of trade, commerce, etc. And I’m not. They don’t get that I’m opposed to our current mode of production, the one specifically that began roughly 4 to 5 centuries ago (depending upon the scholar or scholarly school one sees as authoritative on the matter). I tell them why, but I’ve already lost them by simply opposing “capitalism,” which they see as synonymous with all trade, commerce, Mom, Apple Pie, and the flag, etc. etc.

    The nationalistic aspect of this religious love of “capitalism” is yet another major obstacle, of course. Ironically, America wasn’t a capitalist nation until after the Civil War. We had pockets of the nascent economic system prior to that, but most people lived outside of it.

    in reply to: Don’t Look Up #135220
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    https://www.salon.com/2022/01/04/gangster-capitalists-and-urge-us-dont-look-up_partner/

    Gangster capitalists and corrupt Republicans have a message for us: Don’t look up!
    Netflix hit starring Leonardo DiCaprio offers an urgent fable about how corporate money has distorted our politics

    By Thom Hartmann
    Published January 4, 2022 5:45AM (EST)

    (Labels can be contested, obviously. Some would place Hartman in the liberal camp, not leftist. Regardless, his review raises excellent points, IMO.)

    in reply to: Don’t Look Up #135218
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    WV,

    I can’t remember if any comments were made directly about capitalism, but it’s pretty obvious that the writers and director see capitalism as the biggest hurdle in the way of solving the climate crisis. They also make it clear that financial elites, along with political and media elites, own the vast majority of the blame. It’s not a “blame stupid average Joe and Jane” film.

    Btw, David Sirota was one of the two writers on the project. Some would put him in the leftist category.

    Also, leftists have defended the movie from mainstream attacks. I posted Nathan Robinson’s review. Here’s one from Jacobin:

    https://www.jacobinmag.com/2022/01/adam-mckay-dont-look-up-climate-change-review

    Thom Hartman has a good review as well, over at Salon. Will post the link in another post, to avoid the moderator queue.

    in reply to: Don’t Look Up #135192
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Throwing out subtlety altogether.

    To me, it’s capitalism or the planet. We have to choose. Cuz we can’t have both.

    in reply to: around the league tweets … 1/2 #135191
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Chase is the kind of size/speed athlete that tends to only be there in the First Round. A legit 6 footer, at 200 pounds, he ran a 4.3, with a 41 vert and an 11 foot broad. And to make it all the more impressive, he’s only 21.

    Rams don’t have a shot at players like that. The guys who check all the boxes at their respective positions are gonna be gone by the time the Rams get back into Round One . . . in 2025?

    Also, I always thought the Rams gave up too soon on Quinn. Glad to see him do so well. Just wish it had been for the Rams still.

Viewing 30 posts - 571 through 600 (of 4,301 total)