Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 7,741 through 7,770 (of 8,121 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Wagoner: Rams mailbag #20561
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Herzog wrote:
    as if JT knows.

    Just passing along the info.

    Herzog was making a crack on JT. Cuz he was out of the loop on the Bradford trade.

    in reply to: Who Is Nick Foles? #20546
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    How does anybody know how proactive the Rams were? How do we know they didn’t contact the Browns?

    in reply to: Jim Thomas seems a bit grumpy #20410
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    OK, then why lie about it to the local beat reporters? I can see JT’s frustrations.

    Because you don’t want rumors of Bradford’s trade being turned into a media circus. And the only way to control that is to control that. The moment it’s a shared secret, you cannot control how or where it is shared.

    in reply to: Jim Thomas seems a bit grumpy #20408
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I think I read somewhere that Foles is not much of a vocal leader, either.

    in reply to: Jim Thomas seems a bit grumpy #20405
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I think this is the source of Fisher’s frustration. If we take that statement as truth, then the Rams were basically selling a line of bull the whole time. And, it’s like they were really in Bradford’s camp the whole time. Which is odd, because why wouldn’t you just stay quiet and give out signals that you were shopping Bradford. Maybe you get more offers.

    Or, the statement above is untrue.

    Maybe JT’s just tired of the bull crap. I could see that.

    You assume NFL executives rely on ESPN for their information about who’s on the market. They all know that PR is a separate thing. I think we can safely bet that there were few, if any, teams surprised by Bradford’s trade.

    in reply to: Jim Thomas seems a bit grumpy #20384
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    A few of us were talking about Thomas 2 or 3 weeks ago. I think he’s been souring on the Rams for a while. He can’t talk to Kroenke, and he’s not liking the stadium/LA/move stuff, and he posted the day before Bradford’s trade that he had a source he trusted inside the building tell him there was nothing going on with Foles.

    He isn’t happy.

    in reply to: Welcome back -X- #20383
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    – X – wrote:
    not all is as it seemed.

    That is a cryptic response given your swan song in which the lyrics lacked ambiguity. Don’t hog the cake.

    I am a big fan of your word choice there.

    Delightful understatement.

    It was so unambiguous, I’m pretty sure the post had a Parental Advisory label slapped on it later.

    I’d say the last time I saw X, he was clutching daggers in both hands, arms dripping blood, and howling at the moon. But that was then, and this is now, and I have rued X’s absence from the board a number of times. He’s a good poster, a Bringer of Good Stuff to the board.

    So, let me say, I’m glad you’re back, X.

    in reply to: should the Rams still draft a qb? #20300
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Yes.

    BTW, I see Jake Locker is retiring. That’s a surprise. He came out after Bradford.

    in reply to: Bradford to Eagles, Foles to Rams #20275
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Hold the attitude that, as pujari, you are a servant of the Gods, a channel for the spiritual energies. Only thoughts of God are on your mind as you perform puja, thus enhancing the outpouring of divine blessings. Tradition provides a caution: you should never perform puja during or within 31 days of experiencing severe anger or other deep emotional upset, but it is all right to attend”.

    Given all of the raw emotion and angst over “The Trade”, I’m thinking you probably wanna steer away from this. At least 31 days. It does say you can attend, just not do your own. Maybe start slow, and work up to something next month, or after OTA’s begin.

    Ah, GEEZ, that pisses me off. I already bought the camphor lamp.

    Damn, Damn, Damn.

    in reply to: Tweets – 3/11 free agency and stuff #20274
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    So…is Dunbar gone? Is/was he a FA? I don’t recall seeing his name this off-season.

    in reply to: 5 days ago who knew we would post this #20260
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    in reply to: Tweets – 3/11 free agency and stuff #20256
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Guys, I’m getting old. But I do watch pre-season games. And I don’t really remember this Keenum guy. If a die hard Ram fan doesn’t remember him at all … does that mean he’s pretty forgettable?

    I think they picked him up during the season, after Hill got hurt.

    in reply to: Tweets – 3/11 free agency and stuff #20250
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    They may not be happy with Brockers, but the interest in Fairley does not mean that. It means they need more DTs since they lost Langford. They have only 7 DL now, I think: Long, Quinn, Sims, Hayes, Brockers, Donald, and Westbrook. ‘Tisn’t enough.

    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Do they not know Bradford is not allowed
    to have weapons.

    w
    v

    He can have a RB.

    It’s WRs he can’t have. And – not that I follow Philly closely – but I understand they have been clearing the roster of receiving threats.

    in reply to: Bradford to Eagles, Foles to Rams #20154
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I had it all worked out from my little GM seat on the couch – the Rams would pick up a couple of water buffaloes for the OL, and Bradford would come back to top form, throwing successfully to a not bad group of receivers.

    Now that that little bubble has burst, the OL is still a concern. Foles is coming off an injury, and it has been said that he is not good under pressure. Hope they keep him safe and happy.

    Think he’ll be “horns-worthy”?

    Yeah. I was looking forward to seeing Bradford in a decent environment, too.

    I think Foles will be one of those quarterbacks I will have to think hard to remember in ten years when we try to list all of the QBs who started between Warner and Whoever.

    But I’m going to do a little Ganesh puja tomorrow, and hope for the best.

    in reply to: Question for anyone who does not like the deal #20149
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    bradford is only better than foles if he actually plays.

    my expectation is that bradford doesn’t even start the season.

    He played in the pre-season last year with two months less recovery time than he has had this time. The only way he doesn’t start the season is if he gets hurt AGAIN. But maybe that’s what you meant.

    in reply to: Tweets – 3/11 free agency and stuff #20147
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Per Jim Thomas: Rams have reached out to Detroit DT Nick Fairly. No visit scheduled as of yet.

    DT? That’s the wrong side of the ball,ain’t it? S’post ta be OL, OL and then OL.

    They lost Langford.

    in reply to: Foles is not elevating this team #20106
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Go back through history and find examples of quarterbacks who did well with only five offensive linemen on the team. I’ll save you the time.

    There aren’t any.

    So to blame Foles for the lack of offensive production at this point is just ridiculous.

    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I bet there aren’t many starting NFL QBs whose parents have greater net worth than they do.

    in reply to: Question for anyone who does not like the deal #20020
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I take it for granted that the Rams tried to extend him, and couldn’t agree to anything.

    There’s a lot of things here.

    Bradford is better than Foles. And I think a lot better. I was looking forward to seeing him play with actual receivers and an OL. Of course – even now – at the end of Bradford’s contract – there is no certainty the Rams are going to have that. Which is why I didn’t want Bradford in the first place; I wanted Suh. I think it’s better to add a young QB to a good offense rather than start with a good QB and build around him. But I liked what I saw of Bradford, and think he is a good QB.

    I don’t like the deal. Yet. If I had thought about a Bradford trade, I think I would have imagined a bit more in the deal. Yet the Rams reportedly had more than one team interested in Bradford, and they discussed this for weeks with the Eagles. This is what they could get. And it isn’t terrible. They got a guy who, at worst, is mediocre, and frankly that’s better than what a lot of teams have at the position. Both QBs have upside, and both are a gamble. Truly, in three years time, one of these teams could look brilliant and the other team look completely ridiculous for this trade, and right now, there is no certainty which team is which. We don’t know.

    An interesting aspect of the deal is the salary cap clearance.

    Apparently that mattered to the Rams. It BETTER have mattered. What are they going to do with that cap space? Because that is a significant part of this equation. What they do with that money actually has to be factored into this deal. Will it allow them to keep productive players they would lose otherwise? Are they going to buy a FA or two that they couldn’t have afforded without this?

    So, I dunno. I think we have to see what they do with that cap space to get the whole picture, but my first reaction is – No. I wouldn’t have made this trade.

    in reply to: Bradford to Eagles, Foles to Rams #19935
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    No NFL ticket!! – that’s crazy talk there. I’d have to watch the vikings every week or talk to my wife more. Not many solid options there.

    Well. I’ve never had NFL Ticket, and wouldn’t have got it no matter what anyway.

    in reply to: Bradford to Eagles, Foles to Rams #19924
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I wanna puke.

    I am not going to buy season tickets this year. I am not even going to get NFL Ticket. That’s that.

    Palm Face

    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Well, I think what Foles has that the other available QBs don’t have is an indefinite ceiling.

    All the other guys out there have pretty much exhausted their “potential upside growth.” They are what they are. They are past the point of “hopefully he’ll be better next year.”

    Foles may have peaked, too. We just don’t know for sure yet.

    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I have no objection to Foles. There may be something there. I hope it doesn’t cost a 2nd round pick, though.

    in reply to: Suh signs with Dolphins #19676
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I don’t know how that is structured, but that looks like bad news for everybody. That is better than most QBs make.

    in reply to: Miklasz: Bradford should cut Rams a break #19618
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Zooey: Miklasz Should Cut Rams Fans a Break

    I just had to say that. It was too tempting.

    But, really, the only way Bradford takes a cut this year is with an extension. And so it’s not really a cut, but a cap thing.

    Bradford can go into this year without an extension. If he gets hurt again, his second contract value plummets. If he does well, he gets a pay raise. He may be willing to take that gamble because he’s already made enough money to last a lifetime if he has any financial brains. So he would be betting on himself.

    I don’t have a problem with that.

    in reply to: Ironies in Iraq #19599
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Here’s a discussion that touches on that…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ASaddam_Hussein/naming

    Well, that’s all cleared up.

    in reply to: Ironies in Iraq #19574
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    It is remarkable to me that Saddam Hussein is routinely referred to by his first name. I don’t remember articles referring to Margaret and Ronald.

    There’s Napoleon, of course. But…what the hell?

    in reply to: Darnell Docket signs with 49ers #19512
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I hope he has a forgettable time playing for the 49ers, and has a long, losing season.

    in reply to: Ferguson #19489
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Well.

    That’s disgusting.

    While I’m not surprised that these biases exist, I am surprised by how open and pervasive they are.

    My goodness, what a wreck.

Viewing 30 posts - 7,741 through 7,770 (of 8,121 total)