Hill to start at QB

[Boffo97]

I wonder if this decision is all on Fishers shoulders, or did word come down from the FO that they think Hill gives the Rams a better chance to win.

It's obvious. Davis' recent poor performance gives Kroenke the excuse to insist the better QB be yanked to make a later team move easier.

(j/k/r)

 

[RhodyRams]

I instructed him to so I don't have to pay out on the "Games started by Austin Davis rest of this season." book .

season aint over yet.

If I put Hill in my starting fantasy line up, almost guarantees he goes out with an injury like my other QB's Bradford, Romo, Foles and Palmer

 

[Boffo97]

season aint over yet.

If I put Hill in my starting fantasy line up, almost guarantees he goes out with an injury like my other QB's Bradford, Romo, Foles and Palmer

Somebody stop this maniac!

 

[bwdenverram]

I personally think it's the right move. The biggest difference to me is Hill has been in the league long enough he won't get rattled like Austin seems to have.
It may or may not pan out in terms of a W but I think he gives us the better chance. We just need to come to the game with a good game plan on O.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I think this is a good move. Austin Davis has played admirably, but if winning is what matters then it's time to make a change.

Nah, they just already know that they have seen enough. Probably looked at coaches film and saw receivers wide open and scrambling when not necessary, running into the pass rushers, etc.....and said it is time to figure out if Sean Hill should be signed as the backup QB for another year, in case he has to start while Sam heals or the drafted QB learns.

 

[Yamahopper]

Why not. QB's should be treated like any other player. They get the job done or next man up.

 

[RamFan503]

Pretty much. I mean, what's he gonna say when he names Davis the starter?
"Yeah, he's a day-to-day QB for us. I'll yank him if he doesn't play well in a few games."
He had to give Davis that sort of confidence once he decided to start him.

This is pretty much what I was thinking. The move to naming Davis the starter was not exactly a given in that Davis showed he was THE guy. He had previously named Hill as the starter once the injury was over. But Fish saw something in Davis that might give the team a spark. I am going to guess the rest of the team was with him on the move (except maybe Cook). A coach almost HAS to make statements like this. I doubt anyone can name a coach that doesn't or hasn't in similar situations. When he named Davis the starter, whether you agree with the situation or not, did anyone really expect him to come out and announce him as a temporary starter with a short hook?

Now he has pulled him and he is supposedly flip flopping. Seriously. He saw something in Davis, it didn't work out, so he's going with Hill again. It's pretty simple and absolutely normal SOP.

I think Fish has a lot of problems on his table right now and I think he is very aware of them but I dare say, being viewed as a flip flopper isn't one of them.

There is a credibility issue with that X. What do guys on the roster believe now when he calls them into his office for a hurrah speech and to build them up with big promises of support? Because now they can be sure that when he says something like that it actually means nothing as far as a confidence booster.

The guys on the roster are there every day and see what is going on and no doubt hear what the coaches are saying to the QBs. I highly doubt they think anything about credibility with this move. Do we really think he is saying the same thing to the media that he is saying in practices or in meetings with the players? Even close? For all we know, it was the players themselves coming to Fish or even Schotty saying the change needed to be made.

It was clear that Fish was not happy with the play of Davis over the last couple games especially. I'm sure it is no surprise to the team that a player that was not performing well was benched in favor of someone who might play better or was maybe looking better in practice.

As far as the change itself goes, I really wanted Davis to stay as starter but only if he showed he deserved the role. His play of late has not been anything we could definitively say was deserving of holding on to the starting role. Enter Hill to see if he can change any of that.

I see a key benefit of this move. Knowing. The staff will be able to see if a different QB brings a different result. And I don't mean to say that everything else is a vacuum and therefore it will be cut and dry. I'm referring to when the coaches break down the tape and look at various tells. Much like when @jrry32 and a couple others broke down the tape to break down what AD was actually doing in the games, they will be able to do similar things with Hill and everyone else on the team to be able to make a real comparison. I know I didn't agree with some of what Jrry and others saw in the tapes but the break downs were pretty much what the coaches have been and will continue to do for virtually every play in every scenario.

In all of this, I wouldn't expect a quick hook for Hill either unless he is absolutely stinking up the joint or he gets knocked out of the game.

 

[HometownBoy]

I hate this move and Hill, so to insure I'm right I shall do what I must, get into a brutal street fight with Shaun and break both his knees.

 

[-X-]

View: https://soundcloud.com/101sports/did-jeff-fisher-make-the-right

 

[Mikey Ram]

If Hill comes in there and sucks (and really Denver was not the game to put him into for that not to happen), I think you can officially put me in the "We need a new coach" camp. To make the remarks he did, then flip flop like that was NOT the way to handle this.

With it happening this way, you might as well put a question mark on the thread title since he could just as easily change his mind again. All we know for sure is that Hekker won't be starting as QB.

Yeah, but we don't know he won't start the 2nd half !!!

 

[Mikey Ram]

I really didn't see this coming...Worst case, it will tell Fisher to a point whether it was Davis having the most to do with the problems or if the blame really lies more so somewhere else...I kind of like it, I guess..The only upgrade here, IMO, is that Hill has been around long enough that he might not panic as quickly as Davis did... Guess we'll see...Wonder what Fisher does if Hill stinks it up ??? OUCH, then it could get really messy...And lastly, sometimes change for the sake of change isn't such a bad thing...

 

[Rmfnlt]

Fisher doesn't like turnovers, and this move is because of that. Davis has thrown LOTS of pick 6s as soon as the team gets behind, he's really forcing those bad throws into coverage. Maybe he will learn not to do that, but I'm not too optimistic.
I wonder if some of the other players on the team had anything to do with this move? If the locker room turned on Davis, I could see that factoring into him getting benched.

Maybe Cook knew something before anyone else did

Seems most fans don't believe Fisher handled this very well. I agree.

I hope the players don't look at this and worry if they can trust what he says.

 

[jrry32]

If Hill comes in there and sucks (and really Denver was not the game to put him into for that not to happen), I think you can officially put me in the "We need a new coach" camp. To make the remarks he did, then flip flop like that was NOT the way to handle this.

With it happening this way, you might as well put a question mark on the thread title since he could just as easily change his mind again. All we know for sure is that Hekker won't be starting as QB.

That's a completely trivial complaint and I don't see how it bares at all on his coaching ability.

Davis isn't getting the job done. Glad he's not content just sticking with him because he feels obligated to.

I'm glad he made the decision. Davis just isn't processing things quickly enough, isn't throwing accurately, isn't handling pressure, and struggles seeing short routes over the middle of the field. Rams needed a change.

 

[Leuzer]

The defense won those games inspite of Davis, oh and a fake punt that they had to run because Davis couldnt get a first down.

I was paraphrasing. The real quote from RamFanz was that the Rams can't win behind Davis. Well, yes they have. 3 games in fact. 2 against very good teams. Whether he played well enough in those games isn't what I was disagreeing with. You know and I know that its a team effort. Davis can win games in the NFL, he's just wildly inconsistent and has started to regress in the past few weeks.

 

[DR RAM]

Fisher doesn't like turnovers, and this move is because of that. Davis has thrown LOTS of pick 6s as soon as the team gets behind, he's really forcing those bad throws into coverage. Maybe he will learn not to do that, but I'm not too optimistic.
I wonder if some of the other players on the team had anything to do with this move? If the locker room turned on Davis, I could see that factoring into him getting benched.

I think that is what happened, the locker room forced the change, when I say forced, I mean that I think Fisher felt them wondering if they could win more with Davis, or Hill. I think he had to do it, and I think it was the right move.

 

[RamWoodie]

Can't we just let Fisher decide? Let's face it, coaches are fallible too, and the NFC West is far from decided. I haven't turned against Davis...but we must admit under pressure he's shown to be a rookie. Fisher has an obligation to the team and the fans to put the best product on the field. He decided that Hill should start...SO BE IT!!!

Let's face it...Davis had TA wide open and forced the ball to Britt at a critical time in the game. That makes two weeks in a row Davis has done that in games the Rams could have won.

One cannot blame Fisher for deciding to inset Hill as I see it.

 

[Ram Quixote]

And ... QB controversy ensues (if Hill isn't any better).

I don't see the controversy. All we're doing is comparing backups that pale next to what we had hoped for our injured starter.

The controversy starts next July, when Fisher has to choose between the rehabbing Bradford and whoever we bring in, whether that's a FA, a drafted QB or whoever they decide will be the backup between Davis and Hill.

 

[CGI_Ram]

This is a major flip flop move right here. He promised the kid he wouldn't have to look over his shoulder and 7 games later he goes back on his word. He shouldn't have ever made that promise at all. If I'm a player I don't know If I can be fully behind a coach who doesn't keep his word.

I don't see it this way.

In fact, Fisher kept his word and gave Davis plenty of rope.

Davis did an admirable job. Time to see if Hill can get more out of this offense.

 

[Angry Ram]

Just stick with him for the remainder of the season, and get some consistency.

The Rams are now 0-0 right now.

 

[Lesson]

I don't see the controversy. All we're doing is comparing backups that pale next to what we had hoped for our injured starter.

The controversy starts next July, when Fisher has to choose between the rehabbing Bradford and whoever we bring in, whether that's a FA, a drafted QB or whoever they decide will be the backup between Davis and Hill.

No, the controversy will start, IMO, when a decision will be made on Bradford(whether he's on the roster or not) and go snowball from there.