Well, if the playoffs were now, the Rams would be at Carolina. Dunno if the 49er game tomorrow has an effect on that.

w
v

I was kinda glad the Bears beat the Packers. Packers are 9-5-1 now, and the Rams wont have to ever go to Lambeau. Chicago is not a fun place to play, but I’d rather do that than Lambeau.

I’d rather they get another shot at Carolina than go to Tampa, btw.

w
v

zn wrote:

Nate Atkins@NateAtkins_
… I’ve covered this league for 10 years and never seen it and Sean McVay said he’s never seen it either..

Oh, I’ve seen that kind of thing numerous times. And the players always react just like they did in the Rams game. They just start jogging off the field, until one player figures it out. Granted, I’ve never seen it happen on the goal-line but its happened plenty of times on other parts of the field.

It was the right call; i got no issue with it. But it was just damnable bad luck. And it might cost the Rams a ring. The consequences of that game were huge, as we know.

If the Rams were to play the Seahawks again, in Seattle, I’d pick the Rams. But I doubt they can win THREE road games in a row.

w
v

Damn. Hate to see someone lose their job like that, but special teams has been the weak link.

w
v

The seattle-sports-media and the mainstream-sports-media are all over the place on what to say about Darnold. How do you characterize his performance last night? There are talking-heads saying he proved he can be a clutch QB, by that performance.

2 TDs, 2 INTs, 4 sacks, 84 rating. 22/34 270 yards. And a lateral for 2 points.

I dunno. I’m not sure what he proved last night. I guess he proved he can keep grinding away and not give up. Thats somethin.

Ernest Jones does not like the Rams, btw.

w
v

I thought the Seahawks had a slightly better team after they lost the first game.
This time, i thought the Rams were a slightly better team after they lost this game.
Sigh.

In the first game, Stafford had, like, 130 yards passing. Over 450 yards this time. Who does that against Seattle in Seattle? 3 TDs, no INTs, and a 110 rating — and they lose.

Both games were weird and both teams are evenly matched in weirdly different ways.

Big loss, but it is what it is. The Rams will be in Chicago, or Lambeau or philly or Tampa or Carolina. Perhaps another game in Seattle down the road.

Why does this feel like a playoff loss?

w
v

Zooey wrote:

I believe the Rams will win this game. I have the same level of certainty I had in ’99. Not that that means anything, but just a reflection of my confidence in this team…

I think Seattle at home is a beast.

When they played in LA, Stafford had a 53 percent completion rate. 15 for 28.
Threw for 130 yards. That’s ten more yards than Philip Rivers threw for last week.

This is a lot like Darnold’s big game last year. The Vikings were 14-2. The Lions were 15-1. Whoever won, was going to get the bye and no.1 seed. The loser would drop down to road-hell through the playoffs. Of course Darnold melted down.

But that game was in Detroit.

I think Seattle and the Rams are 1A and 1B. I think they are equal. Seattle has a great D. Rams have a great O. If it were in LA, I’d pick LA. In Seattle, I think it will be Seattle.

Rams 16
Seahawks 17

w
v

So, what do we expect out of Sam Darnold?
Will the Seattle plan be dink and dunk and avoid INTs, or will it be let-it-rip against this rams secondary and try and get some big plays?

w
v

I cued-it to Richard Sherman on Matthew Stafford: