IF the Rams win this week, and get to 7 wins......

[CoachO]

would there still be people who claim this season is a "step backward" considering they lost their starting QB at the midway point of the season?

With all the expectations going into this season, which IMO, were unrealistic given the makeup of this ENTIRE roster, the overwhelming youth and inexperience of many of the skill positions.

Just wondering if people would see matching last year's win total would be enough to make people come to any conclusions, positive or negative?

For me, I have said since training camp this team is better than last years. But I wasn't sure it would translate into more wins.

 

[Angry Ram]

I said 7 to 9 Ws before Sam went down.

After Sam went down I thought the Rams w/ Kellen Clemens @ QB could get 4 Ws, getting the team a 7-9 record. There's still a chance for that.

As for what it means...it means that they have enough talent to win, but not enough to get a winning season. Pretty simple if you ask me.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I think it's still a step forward. If Bradford was healthy, I think we would have beaten the teams we did, plus Seattle and Tennessee, maybe another. That would have put us at 9-7 or better.

 

[BonifayRam]

If the Rams pull off three 2013 year-end wins with a big win in Seattle for a 8 & 8 season......:wow: I know I will be singing a different tune!

 

[A55VA6]

I said before the season anywhere from 7-10 wins was reasonable. So even though it's been a frustrating season.. we're just about where I figured we'd be. 8-8 would feel good.

 

[RaminExile]

I think a lot of people said 7-9 wins. I thought our schedule was tough (but it always is) and so many games in the NFL come down to 1 or 2 plays or calls that could go either way as well. Losing SB8 half way through the season and still competing well and finishing with 8 wins would be quite impressive I should think. It just annoys people when they see teams turn it around in a year, like the Chiefs or Cardinals (and like the Giants will next year).

 

[blackbart]

I thought with Sam the bottom would be 8 wins and possibly as high as 12. I thought Carolina, Seattle, Tennessee and SF at home would be wins Dallas was also in the winnable games.

Once Sam was down and KC was in the mix I thought they wold win between 5-7 games. They have a slim chance to get 8 but I don't know how much Seattle would put into a meaningless game. I believe they will want to keep rolling and not let a division foe have one in their house.

 

[Ramhusker]

I think a lot of people said 7-9 wins. I thought our schedule was tough (but it always is) and so many games in the NFL come down to 1 or 2 plays or calls that could go either way as well. Losing SB8 half way through the season and still competing well and finishing with 8 wins would be quite impressive I should think. It just annoys people when they see teams turn it around in a year, like the Chiefs or Cardinals (and like the Giants will next year).

Last I checked, our schedule was tied for toughest with Atlanta at .528

 

[BigHornRAMM]

I think it's a step forward. I think we would have won 3 more games with Sam..

 

[CGI_Ram]

If the Rams get to 7 wins, under these circumstances, I think it's a springboard to be optimistic next year.

I can't help but think "what might have been"... Not starting the year with spread offense, not losing Sam, and Fisher taking over the D from Walton earlier...

 

[Thordaddy]

I think it's a step forward. I think we would have won 3 more games with Sam..

AT LEAST 2 and that would be 10-6 provided we get to 8-8 although if we'd won the Seattle game the last game would be more likely to be played for more

 

[CoachO]

I thought with Sam the bottom would be 8 wins and possibly as high as 12. I thought Carolina, Seattle, Tennessee and SF at home would be wins Dallas was also in the winnable games.

Once Sam was down and KC was in the mix I thought they wold win between 5-7 games. They have a slim chance to get 8 but I don't know how much Seattle would put into a meaningless game. I believe they will want to keep rolling and not let a division foe have one in their house.

When you look at the 2013 schedule and the wins they have managed to get, and compare it to the 2012 results, I think by anyone's account, there have been more positive (unexpected) wins this year.

2013
Arizona
Houston
Jacksonville
Indianapolis
Chicago
New Orleans
Tampa Bay (for the purpose of this thread)

2012
Washington
Buffalo
Seattle
Arizona (twice)
Tampa Bay
San Francisco

bolded all wins that not many would have expected.

and looking at the losses, don't think many people expected Arizona and Carolina to be two of the most improved teams in the entire NFL.
The disappointing part, is the record within the division this year compared to last. But it needs to be pointed out, they were 1-1 with Bradford in divisional games, and played the others without him.

To me, the games that "got away" this year would be Atlanta and Tennessee. But when compared to the NY Jets, Minnesota and Miami losses of 2012, it does put things in perspective.

All in all, I think this year, while having its frustrating moments, has shown that they are indeed on the right track, and things should continue to progress as they get another year under their belt, and fill in the remaining holes with another strong off season.

 

[ram29jackson]

a year was lost in Bradfords development to see if he's worth a damn as a QB .= this year was a step back for team production.

 

[CoachO]

a year was lost in Bradfords development to see if he's worth a damn as a QB .= this year was a step back for team production.

So you are of the opinion that everything that has to do with this team revolves around Bradford, good or bad?

 

[V3]

Going into the season, I said I was looking for progression from the young players. I wasn't really worried too much about the wins because I never expected to make the playoffs. I haven't seen as much progression from the young players as I had hoped. Jenkins, Austin, Quick, Pead, Givens, Richardson, and a few others to a lesser extent have all either stagnated or regressed, IMO. Some head scratching decisions from the coaches have added to the frustration. So no, I'm not pleased with the season. I expected more.

 

[ram29jackson]

So you are of the opinion that everything that has to do with this team revolves around Bradford, good or bad?

as far as the first lines of the original post...this season was in fact a step backward. everything doesn't revolve around him but he was a very important piece and was lost. If the team played well and he was healthy, assuming he did well, that's probably 1 or 2 more wins at this point. They probably would have won the Panthers game

 

[mr.stlouis]

I said 9-11 wins (Leaned towards 11... Yeah I know), division contender, playoffs, and anything less was a dissappointment it were healthy all year. I think my prediction woulda been real close but Bradford to IR was the dagger.

With that being said, are we better than last year? Absolutely. Our offense was so stagnant last year with the players we had. We do not miss anyone we lost. The only player I'd say we coulda really used at times was Ammendola but I love Tavon being on the field, he's amazing. Plus Ammendola is still injury plagued.

Defensively we took a step back in the secondary but Tru and Jenks really played well last week. Nobody saw Finnegan washing out in dramatic fashion. Our LB's have stepped up in a big way with the addition of Ogletree, dude's a beast. Our safeties are all around better without Craig Dahl and McD playing like the stud he is. I like Stewart, too. We just need a true FS.

Our DL is very impressive. C. Long is very very solid while Quinn and Brockers are playing at very high levels. Quinn is the best player on the team right now and it's not even close. Could be the best DE in the game. Langford wasnt impressing me earlier in the year but he's has played very well as of late. Just a privlage to watch these guys play every week.

Our ST's have taken the biggest jump. Tavon Austin is a tremendous punt returner and he is the answer we've seeked for so long. Love watching him do what he does. Hekker and GZ are doing a great job, as well.

We came up a little short in the end. Our schedule was absolutely brutal but we're still hanging around.500 even without Sam the Man. I'd say a full offseason with our young guys together will make a noticeable difference.

I'd be lieing if I said I'm not dissappointed because I'm very dissappointed. I wanted this to be our break out year in the worst way and strongly beleiver we'd have a better record, it all comes back to Sam. Not finding the running game early hurt a lot but maybe Stacy wasn't ready yet. I tell you what, though, that running game will be established early next year and this team will keep getting better. How much better? After this season be so wildly sporadic it's anybody's guess.

Disclimer: I will deem this season very successful if we go 8-8 and snap Seattle's home win streak. That's a mini Super Bowl for me...

 

[CGI_Ram]

Going into the season, I said I was looking for progression from the young players. I wasn't really worried too much about the wins because I never expected to make the playoffs. I haven't seen as much progression from the young players as I had hoped. Jenkins, Austin, Quick, Pead, Givens, Richardson, and a few others to a lesser extent have all either stagnated or regressed, IMO. Some head scratching decisions from the coaches have added to the frustration. So no, I'm not pleased with the season. I expected more.

Hard to disagree. With progress... The rest takes care of itself.

 

[Rambitious1]

I said 7 to 9 Ws before Sam went down.

After Sam went down I thought the Rams w/ Kellen Clemens @ QB could get 4 Ws, getting the team a 7-9 record. There's still a chance for that.

As for what it means...it means that they have enough talent to win, but not enough to get a winning season. Pretty simple if you ask me.

By and large I agree with you.

I also thought we would be somewhere around 6 to 9 wins WITH Sam at the beginning of the year.
I slightly disagree that it means we do not have enough talent to get a winning season. I think it means right now, that we do not have enough experience and talent to get a winning season.

I think it was a small step forward.

Next year.......................I believe we will have a winning record.

 

[RamsOfCastamere]

Last I checked, our schedule was tied for toughest with Atlanta at .528

Strength of schedule is subjective, IMO. If your record is at the bottom of the league, then the average of every team you play would be higher because you can't play the Jaguars every week. If Atlanta didn't have all those injuries and played to their expected potential, their schedule would be considered easier.