Fisher: 'We're closing the gap'

[RFIP]

Well RFIP, 2014 is the acid test for Sam. If he gets hurt again, he fails. If he doesn't win, he fails. There is enough talent on this team to have a winning season with a very good QB. No more talking around it in 2014, Sam does it or he ain't the guy.

So you believe there was enough talent on the field in Seattle to beat them Sunday with a good QB? If the answer is yes then I have to get my TV adjusted because I saw NOTHING at wr save for bailey, that was worth two shits. And Cook with another lack luster effort. Once they shut down Stacy where was the ball supposed to go?

If the Rams FAIL to get a true #1 then THEY fail.

 

[RFIP]

I would agree on your 9ers statement completely ! The 9ers OL is #3 in the NFL on rushing yards in 2013 but the Seattle is right behind the 9ers @ #4. Rams are #19th.

The nasty run blocking Seahawks OL is that nasty. This Seattle OL averages about 26 yrs where the Ram is over 29 yrs in age. Seattle has invested in 2 first rd picks & 1 second rd pick in their starters since 2010 The Rams have only one Saffold who is a UFA in our starters. This Seattle young starting OL has 217 starts among the five with two of them pro bowlers.

The young pro bowl 25 yr old OLT Okung has 45 starts under his "always injured self". You are correct he has been injured many times close to the Roger Saffold amount. But 45 starts in 4 Just about 3 full NFL seasons of starts of his 4 NFL yrs & has been awarded a pro bowl trip.

I would say this that we saw first hand RFIP this past Sunday the gap between the Seahawks & the Rams OL's. And its a sizable gap. Add that four of the five Ram Ol'ers that we saw last Sunday will be involved in UFA in March. Where 9ers & Seahawks have built their OL's primarily through the draft the Rams have used UFA's. 3 of the Rams high cap cost purchased OL'ers were not on the field this past Sunday either on the IR or way down the depth chart. Rams will not enter post season play but the SF & Seattle will.

I would ask you this then, did you feel the gap between Seattle's OL and Rams OL was sizeable at all in St Louis?

if your answer is that Seattles line was injured then guess what, so was the Rams Sunday.

 

[CoachO]

Better players and filling holes will always help but how does that fix the coaching problems?

OK, I'll stop whining now but I keep having this recurring nightmare of our whole DB corps playing 30 yards off the LOS.



That's to be expected. But I want to see mistakes like a DB missing a chuck of a WR at the LOS.

You do understand, that when you are playing a BACKUP Nickel CB (who happens to be one of your starting safeties), you are extremely vulnerable to consistently playing press coverage. Or early in the season, when you have two starting safeties with a combined ZERO STARTS heading into the season, to expect them to be able to grasp complex coverage schemes, combination coverages, especially when they are going up against the likes of WRs such as L. Fitzgerald, Julio Jones, Dez Bryant in the 1st 3 weeks of the season, is maybe, just maybe part of the reason they did what they did.

Its not as simple as just saying, we should have our CBs play man to man, and press opponents, when there are 11 guys who ALL have to know their assignments. That sort of aggressive approach is a high risk/high reward type of approach. And with a secondary who was reduced to playing 4/5 guys with less than 20 games experience, how much "risk" is worth it?

 

[V3]

IMO, we are closing the gap in large part because of the 2013 draft. Snead's first draft in 2012 was a rookie GM draft. He made the basic mistake of getting fooled by a workout in his over drafting of Quick. And he misevaluated Pead's mental shortcomings, falling in love with his physical talents. I think the same thing applies to Givens as well in terms of mental toughness. Looking back at that draft, the mistake Snead made was not so much the trade down in the 2nd round, it was the picking of a mentally weak player like Pead instead of a workaholic player like Lavonte David, who Fisher said they liked a lot. Imagine the 2012 draft with Jeffery and David, instead of Quick and Pead. Well, we didn't get that because a rookie GM was still learning. Well, Snead appears to have learned in 2013.

This year, Snead got it right in terms of mental toughness as evidenced in the Bailey pick. This kid is tough. I heard Farr say when he was in the Seahawks locker room after the game Sunday that one of the Seahawks DBs said "who is that #12? That boy is tough, he can play." Actually, I believe mental toughness is a common thread in all the 2013 picks. I thought Tavon was mentally tougher than Patterson; Ogletree plays with an edge, so does TJM, and certainly Stacey does too.

2013 looks like a great draft to me. And it is the biggest reason why we are closing the gap in our division. One more draft like that this year should posture us to compete at a very high level. Snead said we are open for business with the #2 pick, and I'm all in on that. We got Brockers and Ogletree in trade downs. So we've seen it work.

As Fisher said yesterday, things change quickly in the NFL. With another strong draft, I expect at least 10 wins in 2014. And yes, it will come down to Bradford making the difference. It truly is a make or break year for Sam. I'm betting on him making it.

I heard that. Farr then asked about the other WR's and the DB just laughed(or something to that effect).

 

[max]

So you believe there was enough talent on the field in Seattle to beat them Sunday with a good QB? If the answer is yes then I have to get my TV adjusted because I saw NOTHING at wr save for bailey, that was worth two shits. And Cook with another lack luster effort. Once they shut down Stacy where was the ball supposed to go?

If the Rams FAIL to get a true #1 then THEY fail.

Here's my case...

If the Rams add a #1WR like a Sammy Watkins, and they address the OL, two things I expect them to do, then will that be enough to have a winning season with a very good QB?

I believe the answer is yes. The defense and STs the Rams will have in 2014 will be good enough to compete in the west.

I believe the Rams plan to trade down and take Watkins. Fisher said they need to score more points, he said they will draft offense and defense. And Snead said he wants to trade down and add a first round pick in 2015. That fits perfectly with trading down from 2 to 6 which is where Watkins will go. And I'm all in on that.

So if the Rams do a simple thing like trade down and draft Watkins and add OL talent, there will be no excuse for Bradford. He will have Watkins, Tavon, and Bailey. If he can't win with that, then he ain't the guy.

That's what I believe. Do you believe Sam needs more than that?

 

[CGI_Ram]

Does drafting Watkins suggest Quick isn't who they thought he was?

 

[max]

I heard that. Farr then asked about the other WR's and the DB just laughed(or something to that effect).

Yup. Farr said the DB was a very big guy. I'm guess it was Chancellor. And he did say the other Rams WRs talk a lot but that's about it. Farr and Randy said Bailey would either be WR1 or WR2 next year. Regardless, Bailey is a starter next year. They had nothing good to say about Quick or Givens. We can't rely on them and I don't think Fisher will.

 

[CoachO]

So you believe there was enough talent on the field in Seattle to beat them Sunday with a good QB? If the answer is yes then I have to get my TV adjusted because I saw NOTHING at wr save for bailey, that was worth two shits. And Cook with another lack luster effort. Once they shut down Stacy where was the ball supposed to go?

If the Rams FAIL to get a true #1 then THEY fail.

They played that game with a backup QB, who we have all watch play with limitations. A backup at LT, at Center, at RG, and regardless of how the year turned out, a backup at Nickel CB.

So to say they played THAT game with enough "talent", would be pure hyperbole. Now, if you insert the starters across the board, and line up vs. that Seattle team, or anyone else on their schedule, I think the argument could be made that they are "talented enough" to compete.

Regardless of the injuries, this team as a whole, improved dramatically as the season progressed. In much the same fashion that LAST YEAR's team did.

For you to ever try to make any accurate evaluation about the WR corp with Clemens at QB is just unfair. Take the one "target" to Brian Quick. He had settled into the soft spot in the zone after running yet again, an intermediate route, (16-18 yards down field), is WIDE OPEN, and Clemens sails the ball 8 feet over his head. How do even try to put that on Quick or any other WR?

There have been too many instances exactly like that one, where receivers are breaking open down field, and Clemens, realizing his limitations, and lack of accuracy, doesn't even look that way. For all of those "fans" who tend t be critical of "Check Down" Bradford, Clemens turned into that and more as the season went on. He was so intent on getting rid of the ball, that unless you were a TE running a drag route to the sideline, or a RB as a safety valve, he barely looked your way.

People are making Bailey out to be the "best WR on this team" based on catching 2-3 passes a game. Seriously?

 

[brokeu91]

Does drafting Watkins suggest Quick isn't who they thought he was?

Perhaps, or maybe they see that without at least one elite WR, if our running game gets shut down then our offense get's shut down. We need guys who can get open even when the opposing defenses know it will be a pass. Someone who can get us a 10 yard reception on 3rd and 10. Bailey might be that guy. Perhaps Quick can step it up and help, but right now I'm not sure he can and if the team isn't fooling themselves, then they should also at least be concerned.

 

[max]

Does drafting Watkins suggest Quick isn't who they thought he was?

Yes. Fisher was saying good thinks about several young players like Bailey and McGee, but nothing about Quick. I believe he doesn't think he can count on Quick going forward. And Givens is not a WR1, not even close.

I'll be surprised if Fisher doesn't want a real WR1 in this draft. I have to agree with RFIP on this, outside of Bailey the Rams don't have a dependable WR. Tavon is not a pure WR, he is multi purpose big play threat, but not an every down WR that can play on the outside. That was supposed to be Quick or maybe Givens. But that ain't happening.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Yes. Fisher was saying good thinks about several young players like Bailey and McGee, but nothing about Quick. I believe he doesn't think he can count on Quick going forward. And Givens is not a WR1, not even close.

I'll be surprised if Fisher doesn't want a real WR1 in this draft. I have to agree with RFIP on this, outside of Bailey the Rams don't have a dependable WR. Tavon is not a pure WR, he is multi purpose big play threat, but not an every down WR that can play on the outside. That was supposed to be Quick or maybe Givens. But that ain't happening.

I don't think any of us have given up on Quick. I just wish he was targeted more as a first option. Because... Particularly with Clemens he never looked Quick's way as the first read.

This is where I remain conflicted with Schotty. First it was Pettis starting, then Stacy starting late, Austin not used creatively, and Bailey not getting a look until late in the season. That's some head scratching stuff.

 

[RFIP]

They played that game with a backup QB, who we have all watch play with limitations. A backup at LT, at Center, at RG, and regardless of how the year turned out, a backup at Nickel CB.

So to say they played THAT game with enough "talent", would be pure hyperbole. Now, if you insert the starters across the board, and line up vs. that Seattle team, or anyone else on their schedule, I think the argument could be made that they are "talented enough" to compete.

Regardless of the injuries, this team as a whole, improved dramatically as the season progressed. In much the same fashion that LAST YEAR's team did.

For you to ever try to make any accurate evaluation about the WR corp with Clemens at QB is just unfair. Take the one "target" to Brian Quick. He had settled into the soft spot in the zone after running yet again, an intermediate route, (16-18 yards down field), is WIDE OPEN, and Clemens sails the ball 8 feet over his head. How do even try to put that on Quick or any other WR?

There have been too many instances exactly like that one, where receivers are breaking open down field, and Clemens, realizing his limitations, and lack of accuracy, doesn't even look that way. For all of those "fans" who tend t be critical of "Check Down" Bradford, Clemens turned into that and more as the season went on. He was so intent on getting rid of the ball, that unless you were a TE running a drag route to the sideline, or a RB as a safety valve, he barely looked your way.

People are making Bailey out to be the "best WR on this team" based on catching 2-3 passes a game. Seriously?

You're too hung up on size, Bailey is clearly the best WIDE receiver on this team period. Best routes, best hands, best compete level, best fighting for yards and biggest heart.

Those are facts coach.

 

[CoachO]

You're too hung up on size, Bailey is clearly the best WIDE receiver on this team period. Best routes, best hands, best compete level, best fighting for yards and biggest heart.

Those are facts coach.

I have never said anything to the contrary. Size has NOTHING to do with it for me. I loved the way Holt and Bruce played the game, and neither of them were over 6'0.

I am NOT saying that Bailey hasn't shown well for himself in his limited opportunities. But I am not ready to christen him as the next best thing to hit this team at the WR position. If you turn the clock back a year, most were making the same sort of statements about Givens.

For me, my comments are more about the lack of support for Quick, Austin and Cook, than it is an indictment on Bailey. I would love to see them go into NEXT season with Bailey, Quick and Austin being the starters, and lets just let them develop.

 

[CoachO]

I don't think any of us have given up on Quick. I just wish he was targeted more as a first option. Because... Particularly with Clemens he never looked Quick's way as the first read.

This is where I remain conflicted with Schotty. First it was Pettis starting, then Stacy starting late, Austin not used creatively, and Bailey not getting a look until late in the season. That's some head scratching stuff.

While hindsight is usually 20/20, for me its not about the "when" they gave players such as Stacy, Bailey their opportunity, its more about the "why". It has been stated frequently, that this offense of Schottenheimer's is complex and almost too extensive. Those comments were heard from New York Jet players AFTER he left, and have been repeated in his days with the Rams.

While it may not look like it to the general fan, the learning curve for these rookies is substantial. Add in the variable of having limited practice time with the new CBA, these guys are naturally going to behind the curve when WEEK ONE rolls around. Pettis being the starter had less to do with ability and more to do with experience. Who was less likely to make mistakes? Same thing for Richardson at the RB position.

It was no accident that the "change" in philosophy happened during the long week (after playing a Thurs game vs. SF) when they were able to prepare with more than 3 practices prior to the Jacksonville game.

 

[max]

I have never said anything to the contrary. Size has NOTHING to do with it for me. I loved the way Holt and Bruce played the game, and neither of them were over 6'0.

I am NOT saying that Bailey hasn't shown well for himself in his limited opportunities. But I am not ready to christen him as the next best thing to hit this team at the WR position. If you turn the clock back a year, most were making the same sort of statements about Givens.

For me, my comments are more about the lack of support for Quick, Austin and Cook, than it is an indictment on Bailey. I would love to see them go into NEXT season with Bailey, Quick and Austin being the starters, and lets just let them develop.

You are pushing Givens down the depth chart. I agree. He just isn't good enough to be a starter.

As far as Quick is concerned, well, maybe he gets it, maybe he doesn't. After 2 full seasons, he doesn't look anything like a quality WR1 to me. And he may never get it. So do you take that chance and go into 2014 with him as your starting WR1? I won't be surprised if Fisher doesn't count on Quick. Fisher said they need to score more points and if he doesn't think he can depend on Quick, then I don't see how he goes into NEXT season with him as his WR1.

 

[Alan]

CoachO with a question:
You do understand, that when you are playing a BACKUP Nickel CB (who happens to be one of your starting safeties), you are extremely vulnerable to consistently playing press coverage. Or early in the season, when you have two starting safeties with a combined ZERO STARTS heading into the season, to expect them to be able to grasp complex coverage schemes, combination coverages, especially when they are going up against the likes of WRs such as L. Fitzgerald, Julio Jones, Dez Bryant in the 1st 3 weeks of the season, is maybe, just maybe part of the reason they did what they did.

Its not as simple as just saying, we should have our CBs play man to man, and press opponents, when there are 11 guys who ALL have to know their assignments. That sort of aggressive approach is a high risk/high reward type of approach. And with a secondary who was reduced to playing 4/5 guys with less than 20 games experience, how much "risk" is worth it?

That all sounds good and reasonable except for these four things:
A) I believe that we started out the season with all of our starters playing.
B) The fact that we're going up against a great WR is a pitiful excuse. Almost every team has a great/bonified #1 WR.
C) How are they supposed to learn their assignments" Osmosis? They need to play man in games and learn from their mistakes. They had many weeks to practice man coverage in TC and what they lacked was real game experience.
D) The coverage they were using in lieu of man coverage wasn't working. At all. It was pathetic. Did I mention how pathetic it was? Did I mention that every single person who wrote about it saw and said the same thing?

Here's a saying I like quite a bit:
http://vuible.com/pin/dont-make-exc...put-flowers-in-an-asshole-and-call-it-a-vase/
Don’t make excuses for him. You can’t put flowers in an asshole and call it a vase.:heh:

But like I said, I'm not asking for anyones head on a pike but if the same thing happens in 2014 it will be a different story.

 

[CoachO]

You are pushing Givens down the depth chart. I agree. He just isn't good enough to be a starter.

As far as Quick is concerned, well, maybe he gets it, maybe he doesn't. After 2 full seasons, he doesn't look anything like a quality WR1 to me. And he may never get it. So do you take that chance and go into 2014 with him as your starting WR1? I won't be surprised if Fisher doesn't count on Quick. Fisher said they need to score more points and if he doesn't think he can depend on Quick, then I don't see how he goes into NEXT season with him as his WR1.

Can we please stop with the WR1 labels? He doesn't have to be, nor does Bailey or Austin. All they have to be is productive STARTERS. Someone please tell me who the WR1 was on the Rams of 1999. Or who the WR1 is on the current Green Bay Packers.

The only labels that concern me ... who is the "X" who is the "Z" in this offense?

 

[EastRam]

Someone please tell me who the WR1 was on the Rams of 1999

Bruuuuce.

 

[brokeu91]

Can we please stop with the WR1 labels? He doesn't have to be, nor does Bailey or Austin. All they have to be is productive STARTERS. Someone please tell me who the WR1 was on the Rams of 1999. Or who the WR1 is on the current Green Bay Packers.

The only labels that concern me ... who is the "X" who is the "Z" in this offense?

I see where you're going with this coach. But, the Rams O in '99 had two guys that were capable of being a #1. I define a #1 as someone who can consistently get open for a 10 yard catch even when the defense know's it's a pass and has good hands. That offense had the best collection of WR talent perhaps in the history of the game.

 

[LesBaker]

Closing the gap? Does he not see that other teams in the West are much better too?

Sam Bradford is the 3rd best qb in the NFC West (maybe the 4th) and that isn't going to change until there are upgrades all around him. All those high picks for what seems like a decade and we are still at 7 wins. It's still tough being a Rams fan. Another year of SOSAR.

If I was an admin I'd be very tempted to ban your ass for that SOSAR reference.