Well, Devin Hester has been doing well as a receiver lately, actually.

And Austin has Schotty as an OC who asks rookies to work into his offense moreso than works with their talents, so Tavon Austin’s head was swimming a bit.

Then again, Schotty’s offense is pretty difficult for WRs in general and when he left, the WRs were all too happy to see him go.

Point taken about the D.

Disagree about why RG3 and Kaepernick aren’t panning out. Both are run first QBs who never really learned to READ DEFENSES. RG3 got hurt and he’s physically never going to be as explosive, thus not the threat he was and Kaepernick is still fast, but it’s no longer a secret that he’s only working with half the field which is a HUGE advantage for the D. Running QBs tend to be “found out” in the NFL by their 2nd or 3rd year.

Russell Wilson is still on the fence. Seattle keeps his attempts down and he’s very smart about WHEN to run and protecting himself. That said, without Lynch, that offense won’t be the same and they won’t be able to just “throw more” because that would expose Wilson.

I think the analyst is just dead wrong on Bradford.

A loss isn’t a loss isn’t a loss.

If we lost to the Giants because Odell Beckham simply had the greatest game a receiver ever had, it’d be hard to get upset about that, especially if the DBs were playing well and he was just All-World.

If we lost to the Seahawks because we couldn’t stop the run, but actually had offensive production and were in the game… I’d be pretty upset about that.

I don’t think we have to choose which victory. If we had to choose, I’d choose beating the Seahawks every day because it’s a division game on the road. But HOW we won would be important. If it were only on a few trick plays and ST plays, but otherwise both Ds just shut the game down, then I dunno. I’d take it and be happy, but it wouldn’t be like BEATING them in their house.

Certainly not like we’ve been BEAT in our house…

Well, Grits, I wouldn’t sweat the process.

In January, the Rams are going to invoke their right to go year to year.

In February, the Rams are almost certainly going to propose the move to LA (forget the term) because if they don’t, they can’t even BE CONSIDERED.

Now, here’s the thing to remember about that move in February. It won’t mean the Rams are moving. It’s just another step in the legal process. It means that the Rams are putting in their ticket so as not to lose the ability to move.

The Rams could still stay and they could still move.

But those legal moves almost certainly WILL happen in January and February unless something blockbuster happens from the former A+B guy working on the Governor’s behalf on the parcel near the Stan Musial bridge. Now, if he’s got some knockout punch for all this, then that might interrupt this process, but short of that… it won’t.

That said, I’ll say it now. Those legal maneuvers do NOT constitute proof that a move is imminent. So, Grits, when they happen…and they almost certainly will… they’re just steps in the process.

Doesn’t mean the Rams are or aren’t moving. Just means those steps aren’t proof of anything. It’s clear now that’s the case and it will be clear then. I’m writing it now not to look prescient, but because it’s knowable now.

I think we’ll finish 7-9….

Which will put us at probably 13 or 14, depending.

That’s a sweet spot because that will get us one of if not the top interior OL, or be a great trading spot for teams wanting to grab their guy who slid past a team or two.

Not sure if it’s possible to work one’s way into the Williams D.

I dunno that. So I can’t say if what he did was irresponsible or not. But… I can say that his defense is now working, so we know it works with this crew.

Frankly, I’ll take that. We were good, but had limits before. This D has the capacity now to be great.

Actually no. The Rams D actually is 2nd in the NFL in points surrendered.

The problem is “points against” are credited to the D which makes the D look bad when those should be credited to the offense, STs or “other”.

Prior to the AZ game, Seattle led the league with 221 pts given up on D, St. Louis was 2nd with 222.

PATs aren’t counted against the D, iirc, as they are ST plays and thus allow 2pt conversions to be allocated properly with STs with the PATs as ST points.

Sorry, R4, but grading a QB by how he performs against that Cards D isn’t going to do anyone any good. Might as well project Aaron Rodgers by how he fared against Buffalo.

Pretty sure he’s not gonna throw 0TDs and 2 Ints every game even against tough Ds. I’m CERTAIN that the Packers aren’t looking QB in the draft…

And Buffalo dominated him for the most part…even though had Jordy Nelson caught that one pass, the game may have still been totally different.

TackleDummy… it’s time to talk to the Doc about lowering the dosage on that Ambien…

Maybe.

I really like Hundley also.

I’d stop rooting for the Rams if they took Winston.

Totally agree if the Rams took Hundley that he’d have to sit for at least a year.

The plan would be to go with Hill unless Bradford were 100%. Short of that, go with Hill until Bradford is ready, then make that decision based on how Hill is playing. If we’re undefeated, don’t change anything. If we’re just missing that something extra to dominate, get Sam in.

Let Hundley learn for the year and really let him cut his teeth on the scout team. That’s how Aaron Rodgers did it. Heck, in that piece on him for ESPN, I think, the vets used to complain and ask him to ease up because running the scout team, he was lighting up the Packers’ starting D.

If it weren’t for that Packers’ D giving away games, Rodgers would be more highly thought of.

That said, once he’s gotten some more numbers…and he will… I’d put him above both Manning, Warner and Brady and just below Unitas and Marino on my All-Time list…

Hill has really been a blessing and I think he’s just a LOT better than folks think, including opposing defenses.

I think opposing defenses think of him as “the 2nd string QB” and he shouldn’t be viewed that way. He should be viewed as a middling starter because I’d totally take him over “starters” like Geno Smith…

If the Rams can enter next year with Bradford, Hill and a high rook like maybe Hundley or Connor Cook… and sit Hundley and let him really learn (and sell him on being the next Aaron Rodgers with this D) then I think the Rams are set even if Bradford can’t really come back until mid-season.

And, I really, REALLY don’t want Sam Bradford coming back too early and risking his knee. Hill can carry the banner until Bradford is really, really ready. Unless the rook is lights out and just flat out earns the starting spot like Wilson did when he was drafted…. I think we’re good with Hill and Sammy B.

The way this D is playing makes my heart soar.

This is what we all hoped for…

Now, if the offense gets squared away this off-season, frankly, I think folks will HAVE to talk about us…

And we’re going to do it in the face of a tough schedule. None of this “worst to first” business because our opponents all sucked. O

Once we get there, we’ll be so damned battle hardened that we’ll be ready to go all the way.

for some reason, Firefox wants to play no videos anymore… even with updated Flash

Edit: I googled it and Firefox wants me to load RealPlayer. Yeah…no.

So… Maybe I might switch back to Safari… Or migrate to Chrome… I dunno. But I don’t like Real, so…not doing that…

• This reply was modified 10 years, 6 months ago by Mackeyser.

Rams could go to the playoffs if Detroit and Dallas go 9-7…

And that doesn’t require any change in the NFC West goings on except of course the Rams finishing 9-7… meaning winning out.

And let’s just say that if the starts align and the Rams get in… NO ONE’s going to want to play this young, HONGRY team

Yeah… ask Minny if it’s a good idea to get rid of a good punter.

Not so much. Especially with Fisher’s game plan, field position is key, so having a punter that can do all that Hekker can do is totally worth the money.

Actually, Cal, while I’m HARDLY a Scalia fan, he’s absolutely RIGHT about the function of the Grand Jury.

It has a function. If you’ve ever seen the movie, My Cousin Vinny (which, like all movies in a legal setting, get aspects of the law incorrect), the inexperienced lawyer Vinny has to appear before the judge at the Arraignment. However, because Vinny understands the law, but not the procedures of the court, he struggles so mightily that he gets himself thrown in jail because he cannot fathom that the arraignment is simply and ONLY the act of entering a plea. That’s it.

Well, the Grand Jury has a specific function.

It is not and never has been about innocence or guilt and that’s why exculpatory evidence is not required.

The Grand Jury is the check on a prosecutor’s power so that a DA can’t just bring ANY charge against ANYONE, ANY time he/she feels like it. So, for major crimes, the DA or AG must go before the Grand Jury and present that prima facie evidence to at least establish that there is at least enough to CHARGE the person. NOT convict. Just to charge.

That is why McCulloch so misused this process. Well, it was two-fold. Firstly, he gave them all the evidence WITHOUT the benefit of rigorous cross examination. Trial juries at least have the adversarial process of the trial in which both sides CONTEST the evidence and THEN they can sort out the evidence. The Grand Jury in the Wilson case didn’t have that. They had the raw evidence and were forced in many cases to accept suspect evidence as is and then make a judgment based on that. If a person receives a proper defense, the trial jury isn’t put through that.

Secondly, DA McCulloch did NOT provide the narrative of WHY the evidence supported the charges. He stated himself that he gave the evidence to the Grand Jury and let them come to their own conclusion and EVEN IN cases where Grand Juries are investigative (like RICO cases), the DA or AG still goes to often great lengths to explain how the evidence supports the charges expressly in order to get indictments.

The very common misunderstanding in this case is that what DA McCulloch did is reasonable.

It not only isn’t reasonable, it’s unconscionable, unethical and sets a potentially disastrous legal precedent for high profile cases. Worse, it preys on the common ignorance of the legal system. DA McCulloch knows full damn well that if Michael Brown had killed Officer Wilson and claimed self-defense, even if there were video directly exonerating him, IT STILL WOULD HAVE GONE TO TRIAL. And the words he would have used were, “it’s important for this to run its course through the legal process”.

Now, if DA McCulloch simply didn’t want to charge Office Wilson, that was always at his discretion. He could have simply refused to charge him. Heck, he could have properly used the Grand Jury, GOT an indictment AND STILL not charged him. That’s happened before, too. Getting an indictment doesn’t automatically mean that the DA must file those charges.

But what DA McCulloch did was wrong on a lot of levels. Unfortunately, because they are procedural, it’s even easier for those who are on Team Wilson (not saying you, just saying those that clearly ARE on Team Wilson) to create tons and tons of obfuscation about how getting it so wrong is OKAY… because the outcome is what they wanted.

It’s really no different than Pats fans being okay with the Spygate cheating because they got 3 Lombardis from it.