Fisher won't change Rams' unique approach to offseason/Wagoner

[drasconis]

Bradford went out in the last preseason game and they had a scrub journeyman and a guy who was out of football for a backup plan and Hill did not last the full game against Minnesota. 2 major screw ups having Bradford play behind Long and not having a better back up. They needed a better start but mostly they needed a better QB

Fully agree they need a better answer at QB (hopefully they have it), just saying the slow start is a seperate and reasonable issue to discuss. Bradford went out in the 3rd preseson game (not the 4th) so the team had plenty of time to adjust. Hill then started and got us 0 points in the half he played, it can be argued that the Rams should have problems once Austin came in...but dear lord they were held scoreless by the Vikes in the first half, and didn't sack Cassel the entire game (which had nothing to do with the QB).

 

[Rams43]

Maybe the lack of a starting qb has a lil bit to do with it?

The lack of a starting QB was a serious blow, Rabid. No doubt about it.

But Fisher's teams, including the Titans, have been slow starters for a long time.

Plus zero points by Hill in first half? The players on O were playing like they had just been introduced in pre game warm ups.

And the D was no better.

Let's face it, the team was the epitome of looking unprepared. And for the home crowd, too. It was embarrassing.

Can't blame all the above on an injured Bradford, can we?

 

[Ram Quixote]

The team should have had plenty of time to prepare to having a weaker QB (it isn't like SB went down in that game), heck it was the fewest points given up by MN last year. Scoring 6 points in the first game screams you are not prepared

Bradford went out in the 3rd preseson game (not the 4th) so the team had plenty of time to adjust.

Yes, but what happened is that Fisher didn't play Hill at all in the 4th preseason game, which was a departure for him. He typically plays his starters most of the first half. He didn't because of Bradford's injury. That's what set them back. That and the Oline wasn't ready to go at all against Minnesota.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Yes, but what happened is that Fisher didn't play Hill at all in the 4th preseason game, which was a departure for him. He typically plays his starters most of the first half. He didn't because of Bradford's injury.
RQ,
I'm not sure I follow this. If I recall correctly, Bradford went down (for good) early on... and Fisher was clear that the starter job was Hill's. So, why didn't he start Hill in that 4th pre-season game, as has been his custom?

That's what set them back. That and the Oline wasn't ready to go at all against Minnesota.
Why wasn't the Oline ready?

 

[Ram Quixote]

@Rmfnlt Bradford went down in the 3rd Preseason game against the Browns. I think what happened is that Fisher chose not to use any of his starters in the 4th game. This kept the Oline from any kind of cohesion. Fisher typically puts his starters in for the whole first half, but he didn't do that at all.

Also remember, the 3rd preseason game was Long's first. Subsequently, he didn't play at all in the 4th game.

The result was an unprepared Oline against the Vikings.

 

[MrMotes]

Most teams sit their starters in the 4th preseason game: It's scrubs against scrubs to see who makes the bottom of the roster.

We lost Bradford in the 3rd preseason game and Hill at halftime in the first regular season game putting us on our 3rd string QB by the second half of the first game...

 

[blackbart]

Fully agree they need a better answer at QB (hopefully they have it), just saying the slow start is a seperate and reasonable issue to discuss. Bradford went out in the 3rd preseson game (not the 4th) so the team had plenty of time to adjust. Hill then started and got us 0 points in the half he played, it can be argued that the Rams should have problems once Austin came in...but dear lord they were held scoreless by the Vikes in the first half, and didn't sack Cassel the entire game (which had nothing to do with the QB).

I hated the way they were using Quinn in the start of the season they had him primarily containing and not attacking the QB. He ran straight up field and took himself out of most plays with little or no impact the first quarter of the season. I understand learning the nuances of the "new DC" took a little time but I do agree that should not have taken that long to figure out.

When it comes to the QB position there aren't many teams in the league going to contend with their back up so losing Bradford in preseason had to be devastating to the entire team not just the offense. There was a lot of promise in the offseason and everyone expected to make the playoffs, when you know that isn't happening game 1 you have to expect there was going to be a huge let down.

2012 and 2013 they just did not have enough talent yet to think about anything but staying healthy during the rebuild process.