Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
ZooeyModeratorHappy Birthday, RM.
I bought you a little token gift, but the stupid thing accidentally got locked in a spare time capsule I had laying around. Shouldn’t be too too long before you get it; the capsule is set to open the very second the Rams next qualify for a playoff game…
Pssst, one more thing. Not trying to be critical or nothin, but those footballs on the side of the cake that ZN baked you look a little DE-FLAY-TED, don’t they?
You should register a complaint.
And that first cake…clearly a holiday cake. And when’s the last time the Rams played a game that meant anything in December? It’s almost as if zn is taunting RM.
January 22, 2015 at 11:07 am in reply to: Some clarification on Chudzinski & other coordinator search news #17134ZooeyModeratorSo if his contract is up in a week why the hell not just let him interview?
If I’m Chud, I look at the Colts and think–“Well screw you.”
It’s sort of pointless.
It tells him that they really want him to stay. That’s all it does, but it does it powerfully.
ZooeyModeratorI was going to be the first one to wish you a happy birthday, but the traffic was bad, and my alarm clock didn’t go off.
ZooeyModeratorI do really like Richard Sherman. I can’t help it. He’s got game, and while he talks trash, for the most part it’s pretty smart trash.
He’s my favorite non-Ram, I think. Though, come to think of it, I don’t think there is another player on that particular list.
ZooeyModeratorIt’s easy to have a record like that when you have 3 weakling teams in your division
No, it isn’t.
It certainly helps. But that is quite a sustained run. They retooled repeatedly and stayed competitive. They did not sink to the level of their division. So maybe there are some seasons in there where their record looks better than they were, but that is a damn impressive run.
ZooeyModeratorHow do you go about investigating a claim like that?
Too late to investigate the balls. So…you just ask them if they cheated or not?
January 18, 2015 at 6:42 pm in reply to: Seattle doing nothing so far (he said in the 1st half) #16828ZooeyModeratorSeattle had no business winning that game. 5 turnovers? An onside kick? A Hail Mary 2-point conversion?
I don’t like it. That wasn’t a quality win.
Oh, well.
Go Indy, and if that fails, go ‘Hawks.
ZooeyModeratorIf they bring Wells back i will
seriously question their intelligence.w
vIf they bring Wells back, they should cut Jones. Because if Jones can’t perform better than Wells….
The only reason I remain uncertain on Wells (and I’d like him gone) is that the Rams may think he’s likely to be healthier next year, and worth keeping. Clearly if the decision is based on his performance, there’s got to be a better option. Wagoner mentioned Hudson, and he’s 26. That’s the kind of guy I’d like. Someone who can be the C for 8 – 10 years.
ZooeyModeratorI take it for granted that Long is gone, but I don’t expect a lot of FA action with the Rams. I wouldn’t be surprised if they picked up a G or C, but I think I would be surprised if they got both. I think Bradford and Langford are back. I dunno on Wells. Clearly, the Rams don’t think they have anybody as good as a bashed up and mangled Scott Wells, or Wells would have sat last year. So unless they sign a FA there, Wells is back.
January 17, 2015 at 9:26 pm in reply to: relocation: Former Raiders CEO Amy Trask Talks Kroenke, Rams' Future & Stadium #16773ZooeyModeratorHas not mattered for 20 years so no it doesn’t matter now.
For the last 20 years, there has been no decision to make.
There is now.
ZooeyModeratorI think it will be Seattle and New England.
Which isn’t what I am hoping for.
I would prefer the Rams against the Raiders.
But I don’t see that as a realistic possibility at this point.
January 17, 2015 at 7:08 pm in reply to: relocation: Former Raiders CEO Amy Trask Talks Kroenke, Rams' Future & Stadium #16759ZooeyModeratorI don’t know what this is worth.
But I think the most glorious outcome right now for the NFL is Kroenke’s stadium. Of all the outcomes I look at right now, Kroenke’s is the sexiest.
Does that matter?
Well…it might.
January 17, 2015 at 1:51 pm in reply to: relocation: Former Raiders CEO Amy Trask Talks Kroenke, Rams' Future & Stadium #16748ZooeyModerator<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Winnbrad wrote:</div>
So it seems what Stan needs to do is convince 31 rich white guys, and the Green Bay Packers, that he isn’t a “rogue agent”.24 rich white guys, not 31.
w
v23 because he’s already one.
January 17, 2015 at 12:17 pm in reply to: relocation: Former Raiders CEO Amy Trask Talks Kroenke, Rams' Future & Stadium #16743ZooeyModeratoralso the tv revenue. is that one year or indefinite?
I am sure that would end up going to court and eventually being negotiated. Nobody knows what the league would do if Stan went rogue, not even the league. Grubman said nobody is thinking about that right now, and I believe him. Why would you spend energy on that when it’s a remote possibility at this point?
I don’t think Kroenke is going to go rogue, either. I’ve said all along I don’t think it’s in his nature, judging by his history; moreover, Grubman confirmed that the league knew in advance of the LA project Kroenke announced.
Really, now that the NFL has spoken, it appears to me that the whole process is being measured carefully, and nothing is certain yet…except that there WILL be a team in Los Angeles soon, probably 2016.
There are now three viable stadium plans for Los Angeles. (I am calling Kroenke’s plan viable a bit prematurely. It has not yet been sanctioned politically/environmentally, but I think it’s pretty safe to assume it will be). The holdup on the other two stadiums is that the investors involved in those projects want to be in ownership of the tenant. If I have my facts straight, one of the projects wants to own the team, and the other would be willing to own a mere 35% of the team. So far no team has made itself available.
That could change.
I have no idea what Davis is thinking in Oakland, but it is clear that Spanos wants LA. With Kroenke making a strong move, Spanos has now got to come up with a plan a little more proactive than simply throwing a hissy fit and rallying a few owners to vote No on the Rams. He may be able to delay things a bit, but I don’t think that he can hold up the Rams indefinitely without a viable alternative plan for re-colonizing Los Angeles. Would he sell 35% of the Chargers? Or negotiate something like that…25% or something? He now has pressure to make a deal; so do the stadium consortiums. They have to get something done soon, or their plans go up in flames. The clock is now ticking on everybody with an interest in Los Angeles.
And should Spanos be willing to sell part of the Chargers, he could jump ahead of Kroenke in the timeline because the other two stadiums in question are already approved and could start building tomorrow, afaik.
I did not know, btw, that 1/4 of the Chargers’ season tickets are from LA. If that is true, Spanos’ case for rights to LA is a bit stronger than I previously thought it was.
ZooeyModerator3 years of slow, soul-degrading decline sounds good to me.
Especially if the cupboards are completely bare, and the 9ers are in salary cap hell at the end of 2017.
Works for me.
January 16, 2015 at 8:36 pm in reply to: Brian Quick: Kenny Britt's presence meant a lot – Video #16720ZooeyModeratorI think i would rather learn the secret
to making good cornbread.w
vI can give you my grandmother’s recipe if you want.
ZooeyModeratorSummerall and Madden were the best.
Summerall went a coupla years too long.
ZooeyModeratorThat 11-5 record – (11-6 if one counts the playoffs) – was sitting at 8-1 when they first started their backup QB. So from that point on, the Cards went 3-4… (3-5 if you count the loss to the 7-9 Panthers in the playoffs).
Oh, and, btw.
If one counts the post-Carson Palmer record at 3-5… and I do… just take note of the fact that 3-5 x 2 = 6-10. Exactly Fisher’s record without Sam Bradford.
ZooeyModeratorSee, for me, the focus here isn’t on Bernie. I am not really interested in the question of whether this is Good or Bad Bernie.
The excerpts above express my observations and conclusions about the team pretty well. I think Bernie is telling the truth about a generally inept organization that has yet to turn things around.
How the coaching staff can claim progress after the past season just astonishes me.
And, at the risk of offending people I consider my friends, I’ll just say that I am bewildered by the fact that Bernie’s comments generate more grousing about Bernie than agreement that the Rams have not yet achieved anything in more than a decade.
Making claims to some nebulous level of improvement in talent level does not constitute growth in a league in which achievement is based on the results of a small number of games. You have to show that you can win, Baby. You have only 16 shots at doing it. Each game is precious, with immense pressure on the Win or Loss result. And the Rams have egregiously failed at that competitive challenge for 11 years.
It’s time that they were called on it. Bernie has done so. If you read closely, JT is doing it, too. The Rams standards are so low that a 6-10 season following a 7-9 season can be publicly described by the team leadership as improvement. That ought to be universally seen as appalling.
In my opinion, of course.
Who is claiming Bernie is wrong?
Speaking for myself, my complaint was that there was nothing new in there. No fresh insights. He’s said the same thing before. The difference is that this time he’s let his pissiness about the LA stadium seep into his perceptive analysis that the Rams’ record is still a losing record.
Meanwhile…since you brought it up…most of us find the Bradford injuries to be significant contributors to the Rams’ record, making it worse than it would have been. In other words, the team IS getting more talented even if the record isn’t improving. And it’s not like anybody is HAPPY with 6-10. We just don’t think that’s the whole story. You and Bernie can bottom line it if you want. Some of us think we have reason to optimistic that the team is close to playoff caliber if only it had a competent QB.
And…Bernie says this:
If Arizona coach Bruce Arians can lead the Cardinals to an 11-5 record with a roster torn by injuries, and with considerable turmoil at the quarterback position, then the Rams’ 6-10 record should be deemed unacceptable.
That 11-5 record – (11-6 if one counts the playoffs) – was sitting at 8-1 when they first started their backup QB. So from that point on, the Cards went 3-4… (3-5 if you count the loss to the 7-9 Panthers in the playoffs).
So…sorry if I’m not buying the crap Bernie is peddling with that particular argument. Turns out the genius Arians wasn’t all that good without Carson Palmer. And that was with a veteran team that had already gelled together.
ZooeyModeratorSo Bernie had a deadline and couldn’t think of anything fresh to write about.
ZooeyModeratorOkay. This has nothing to do with this thread, really, but the comment that rules are geared to promote scoring reminded me of a rule I’ve never liked. Two feet in bounds for a catch.
I prefer the college rule. One foot in bounds, and it’s a catch.
Change that and – voila – more scoring. That isn’t why I prefer that rule, though. I like low scoring games as much as high scoring games. I just think it makes sense. One foot in. You’re in.
January 13, 2015 at 9:43 am in reply to: relocation thread #3, starting with Chargers stirring up a fight #16421ZooeyModerator@ 39 seconds in. The Broncos might be for sale in 2015. That could add an interesting twist to the drama.
That will be a complete game changer if it turns out to be true.
January 12, 2015 at 2:26 pm in reply to: new relocation thread! starting with JT: Kroenke faces rough road out of town #16364ZooeyModeratorI agree it’s for value, not cash flow. It does give him access to more cash, though, as bnw points out.
But I don’t think any amount of increased cash is really going to change Kroenke’s standard of living at this point.
It’s value, and a big, bold, shiny thing. He gets to host Super Bowls and Olympics and World Cups and Stuff.
January 12, 2015 at 2:21 pm in reply to: relocation thread #3, starting with Chargers stirring up a fight #16363ZooeyModeratorPA Ram wrote:
I’m not so sure that San Diego and Oakland get priority because they’re already in the state of California. I mean legally, I’m not sure what difference it makes.“The Rams voluntarily left the Los Angeles and Orange County markets, and some owners may question whether they deserve to return — especially if it means that the stadium situations of the two California teams remain unresolved,” an unnamed team official told Daniel Kaplan of SportsBusiness Journal.
San Diego may need a better argument than that.
Well, the Chargers don’t want the Rams in LA because they have aspirations in that market including a possible relocation there. Interesting that they use a ‘Rams left LA voluntarily’ argument against the Rams when that same argument would apply to them. Didn’t they also leave LA voluntarily?
The argument is meaningless anyway.
Yes, they left voluntarily, too. It won’t take more than 5 minutes for someone to point that out to Spanos. And, as everyone has noted, it’s a meaningless argument in any event.
What isn’t meaningless is that the Chargers will try to stop Kroenke.
What is also true:
“A move by the Rams would generate significant political and legal controversy for an NFL Commissioner [Roger Goodell] who is already bedraggled and besieged on various fronts,” the unnamed Chargers official said.
And. There is the possibility of two teams in LA, so even if Spanos wants LA himself, his preference for that is still not a deciding factor. I’m sure Spanos can make this thing messy, but ultimately to what end? Even if he stops Kroenke, he is no closer to moving to LA.
ZooeyModeratorHis left knee touches before the ball hits the ground.
I don’t think he’s bobbling the ball before it hits the ground.
If that isn’t a catch, I think it ought to be.
ZooeyModeratorI thought it was an obvious catch, but I guess the rules say otherwise. I think it was the right call, but still unfortunate.
Yeah, apparently it’s the right call, so it’s a bad rule.
The ground can’t cause a fumble, but it can cause an incompletion.
I’m fine with Dallas losing (and they may have lost anyway; there was time), but Bryant had control of that ball.
January 12, 2015 at 9:42 am in reply to: new relocation thread! starting with JT: Kroenke faces rough road out of town #16327ZooeyModeratorI do not know if the proceeds from having a “retail park” even balances the costs of moving, in his lifetime.
You mean he will enrich himself by more than a billion dollars, and not have to pay taxes on it because of the way the numbers look on paper?
January 11, 2015 at 11:15 am in reply to: new relocation thread! starting with JT: Kroenke faces rough road out of town #16260ZooeyModeratorIf the L.A. proposal was just a negotiating tactic, that would likely be the cruelest joke of all … on St. Louis and Los Angeles.
But, I tend to think that Kroenke likes having options, and while having a site in L.A. doesn’t guarantee a move, it makes it quite possible, and either SK has a more valuable franchise in L.A. or a sweetheart deal in St. Louis. Or, he has a sweetheart deal in St. Louis AND offers the NFL an attractive option to move a franchise to L.A.
You now have interpretations of “good faith efforts” to find a stadium solution to stay in St. Louis. I think the consensus here is that the NFL could decide that SK gave it a good faith effort. Maybe not right now … but after going through more of this negotiating process. I’m not saying it’s a good case that there was a good faith effort, but when did fairness stop the NFL from doing what’s best for “The League”?
Kroenke’s response (or, rather his team’s response, since we won’t see SK or hear directly from him during negotiations) will tell us a lot. If there’s a response asking St. Louis to do a lot more to keep the Rams here, I’d say we’ll know SK’s true intentions. Because the stadium plan put forth is more than fair. It’s not the 80,000-seat stadium and surrounding development in the L.A. plan, but SK could easily do something like that here if he ponied up more money — since the L.A. plan is all privately financed.
It’s a joke, really. We see that it’s possible to privately finance the entire L.A. project. But, in St. Louis, where the franchise admittedly isn’t worth nearly as much, we’re to accept that SK could only afford a $200M portion. Pshaw.
It’s not about what he can afford. It’s about return on investment. The St. Louis deal would cost less of Stan’s money, but the return isn’t as great either. The value of the Rams doesn’t go up anywhere near as much, and he wouldn’t control the revenue streams that come from the use of the facility.
ZooeyModeratorBut Mack, the NFL wouldn’t be taking back control of what happens in LA. Stan owns the land.
January 10, 2015 at 5:54 pm in reply to: new relocation thread! starting with JT: Kroenke faces rough road out of town #16180ZooeyModeratorYou know what I was just thinking. The peacock proposal was very careful in word choice. They pitched the stadium to the NFL. They clearly are thinking post-Rams. Not that they want the Rams to leave, or believe it is a done deal, but they are preparing for that possibility.
And the Jags make a lot of sense.
A twofer is a good possibility here.
-
AuthorPosts
