HighPlainsDrifter wrote:

I thought the Minnesota game was the “easy” one among the first ten games. And they got crushed. I honestly believe that they have a real shot at an 0-10 start and I believe it has a real chance to get real ugly along the way. I guess if I see something positive, it’s that the Rams might find themselves in the Jameis Winston sweepstakes. Of course, if Winston thinks he might be sentenced to a career in St. Louis, he might just stay in college.

Well, i think they could win a lot of games
if the OLine hold up, and Roman Gabriel
comes out of retirement.

Two big Ifs,
i know.

w
v

Well, itz a crazy-zany idea, but
it would be nice if the Rams
offense could score some points.
That would be one way of helping
the defense.

w
v

zn wrote:

The 2nd half? Well I have been saying it all night so far but…that’s probably what happens when your #3 qb plays in game one…….

Well then I blame Fisher
for not using the no.4 QB.

w
v

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

The Rams win.

Cause its year Three.

w
v

Dick Stockton is doing the Viking game.

Ugh.

Stockton should have retired about
three years ago.

w
v

I wanna see ram defenders
launch themselves into Joe Kapp’s
groin,
when he tries to hurdle them
on third and long.

w
v

zn wrote:

wv wrote:
I’d love to see Bradford come back
next year and have an MVP year.

Its possible.

w
v

I think it is possible. I also think the Rams think so too.

Obviously they would not extend his contract,
and i assume they will simply pay him
the fifteen million (or whatever it is) next year — yes? no?

w
v

I’d love to see Bradford come back
next year and have an MVP year.

Its possible.

w
v

zn wrote:

This issue raises all sorts of other thoughts.

In 2013, there were several linemen taken high in the 1st round and all but 1 struggled. In fact this summer, both Warmack and Cooper were still struggling.

That’s not the Rams way. Boudreau does things differently. And (I submit) for good reasons.

#1. Starting young OL immediately is not a universally good idea. As I said, all but one of the linemen picked in the top 10 last year, for example, struggled. That is probably because with increased emphasis on the passing game, the defense counters with increased emphasis on the pass rush, which in turn means that linemen need to be able to read defensive fronts and execute an array of protections–and they have to process all that quickly. Rookies will not always be good at that.

#2. The days of year to year OL continuity are over. Since 93, according to a study I posted here, teams on avg. replace 3.5 OL starters every 2 years. One response to that is to coach in flexibility. Notice for example that Person plays all 5 positions. GR plays 2. That means that in the short term their heads will be swimming but in the long term your line is better off.

#3. One way to handle the flexibility issue is to rotate linemen. Give the younger players some snaps, so they get a feel for it, but don’t just plop them in there to learn the hard way.

So we notice that instead of making a lineman struggle on a team that already lost 1 qb, they’re taking their sweet time with him. That’s not a bad thing, it’s a good thing–especially since they already provided for this scenario by signing Joseph.

The issue will be Long, not Robinson. But even then they have Saffold. It is a RARE team that is 3 deep at LOT. Long, Saffold, Robinson, and Person as the emergency utility guy. So they clearly thought about this.

Another thing this tells us is that Fisher is not acting like he is on a 3-year plan. He does things that favor future pay-off, not immediate pay-off. And for good reason–ownership backs him. Kroenke has owned teams before and his pattern is clear–he hires a proven vet coach or manager. He gives that guy time, and free rein (or, free reign…same thing). He does not sweat it if their are speed bumps on the way, as long as the team is clearly developing the right direction.

Fisher has a 5 year deal. He won’t be in trouble after year 3. It’s not SK’s way of doing things. So there is no make or break year 3.

I agree with all
that.

They have the ‘talent’ now. The Players.
Will they stay ‘healthy’ is
the question for ‘talented’ teams.
If they can stay healthy they can compete
with any team in the West. In fact i think
they match up better with the West-teams
than teams like GreenBay.

It will be interesting to see
if patience paid off with
Brian Quick btw.

I am ready
for some
football.

w
v

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

It will be interesting to see how many
snaps Robinson gets in the game.
I dont really care who ‘starts’.

w
v

Mackeyser wrote:

The onion… both impresses and depresses… at the same time.

Yup. Much like Tom Tomorrow
who zooey willfully refuses
to post anymore.

w
v

Brian S: “I was very comfortable (against Cleveland) calling plays with Austin. And that’s probably the biggest compliment I can give a quarterback. As a play-caller, if you’re comfortable calling plays, and you don’t have to sit there and worry, ‘Oh, I can’t do this, I can’t do that,’ that’s the sign that there’s a lot of respect and trust.”
——————————————

I wonder if he was thinking about anyone in particular
there?

w
v

nittany ram wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>wv wrote:</div>
Thanks for all the info
over the years,
rambill.

w
v

So what are tying to say?

That Rambill is old?!

Rude.

I suspect he was Posting Ram articles when
Fast Eddie, Team Builder and Smack Chick
were in Kindergarten.

w
v