Mike Karney Q and A

[Selassie I]

LOL

Can't wait for that app to come out for my ipad.

 

[Faceplant]

I'm with ZN on this one. That team completely quit on Linehan. In fact, I think they pretty much quit on him in 2007 after Linehan criticized Bruce and wouldn't take any advice from the players. But, I never did see the Rams quit on Spags.

Again, a totally different roster that had been achieved success in the league. Half of this roster is lucky to have a friggin job in the NFL at all. Doesn't surprise me that they have kept quiet for the most part....

 

[Anonymous]

I'm with ZN on this one. That team completely quit on Linehan. In fact, I think they pretty much quit on him in 2007 after Linehan criticized Bruce and wouldn't take any advice from the players. But, I never did see the Rams quit on Spags.

Again, a totally different roster that had been achieved success in the league. Half of this roster is lucky to have a friggin job in the NFL at all. Doesn't surprise me that they have kept quiet for the most part....

"Not quitting" and "keeping quiet" are different things. And in terms of half the roster being lucky to have a job? Well how many Linehan guys survived to make the 2009 roster? I don't think it was even HALF.

Yet it was easy to tell at the time that the team did not respect Linehan. Players say things off the record (and actually in 2008 Jackson said something ON the record), reporters see the locker room, the average fan can tell when a team is quitting.

Earlier I did a little quick and lazy research and it was easy to come up with a few examples. And I wasn't trying hard:

Gordo Chat
Sunday, September 14, 2008

The veterans know this team is doomed. They battled OK for most of the game. But the cave-in at the end was discouraging to say the least. How does the team come back from that? This staff lost a lot of ground in two weeks. Something big has to happen soon.

Linehan’s Status
By Bernie Miklasz
Sun Sep 28, 2008

suppose that the players’ take their (mostly) silent rebellion to the next level? Suppose there’s a hostile meeting between Linehan and the owner, Chip Rosenbloom?

Linehan's future as bleak as Rams' second half
By Jeff Gordon
STLTODAY.COM SPORTS COLUMNIST
Sunday, Sep. 28 2008

Linehan tried to muscle up this week. He cut cornerback Fakhir Brown -- who has been recovering from a shoulder injury -– and forced struggling Tye Hill back into the starting lineup.

He benched battered Marc Bulger and named Trent Green the new starting quarterback. In response, Bulger told others in the organization that he didn’t want to play for Linehan any more, sources told the Post-Dispatch.

Jackson weighed in on his behalf, telling a radio audience that he disagreed with the benching -– and that some of his teammates agreed with him.

Second-half collapse fits Rams pattern
By Bernie Miklasz
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Monday, Sep. 29 2008

Green was the coach's hand-picked quarterback for this game, inserted after Linehan benched starter Marc Bulger -- apparently against the wishes of many Rams players and offensive coordinator Al Saunders.

In the locker room, Linehan paused to stop by Trent Green's locker. "Thanks for battling out there," Linehan told the quarterback. There wasn't much interaction as players went about their postgame rounds, largely ignoring the head coach.

Gordo Chat
Mon Sep 29, 2008

I heard a story late last night on ESPN that Scott Linehan looked into trading Torry Holt, mostly due tot he fact that they do not get along. Have you heard anything about this?

Thanks!

-Shawn in Colorado

Jeff Gordon: We've seen and heard about a lot of similar stuff this week. Brown's cut came out of left field, nobody would be shocked if more stuff was going on. Scott doesn't have the juice to move Holt. He did, however, have the juice to move Brown. On the "releasing players" front, he must have been tempted to turn Bulger loose after Marc reportedly told people he didn't want to play for Scott any more. But, again, Scott didn't have much juice.

Rams' Long learning hard lessons in rookie season
By Steve Wyche | NFL.com
Fri Oct 3, 2008

Compounded with an 0-4 start and the mixed feelings some players had toward Linehan, things were unhealthy.

This kind of stuff, if it is happening, is always easy to find out about. 53 plus injured reserve and the practice squad--that's a lot of guys.

So this whole "well of course no one speaks out" line is going nowhere. That's not how things work. If a team rejects its coach, that kind of thing is always easy to find out about. It's not the kind of thing that can be kept quiet.

 

[Selassie I]

Not respecting the coach and/or not agreeing with the coaches decisions is NOT the same thing as quiting on the field.

Bulgless "may" have said he didn't want to play for Loserhan ,,, but he did (even though he sucked).

None of these examples lists a specific player quitting on the field at any given time.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm with ZN on this one. That team completely quit on Linehan. In fact, I think they pretty much quit on him in 2007 after Linehan criticized Bruce and wouldn't take any advice from the players. But, I never did see the Rams quit on Spags.

Again, a totally different roster that had been achieved success in the league. Half of this roster is lucky to have a friggin job in the NFL at all. Doesn't surprise me that they have kept quiet for the most part....

"Not quitting" and "keeping quiet" are different things. And in terms of half the roster being lucky to have a job? Well how many Linehan guys survived to make the 2009 roster? I don't think it was even HALF.

Yet it was easy to tell at the time that the team did not respect Linehan. Players say things off the record (and actually in 2008 Jackson said something ON the record), reporters see the locker room, the average fan can tell when a team is quitting.

Earlier I did a little quick and lazy research and it was easy to come up with a few examples. And I wasn't trying hard:

Gordo Chat
Sunday, September 14, 2008

The veterans know this team is doomed. They battled OK for most of the game. But the cave-in at the end was discouraging to say the least. How does the team come back from that? This staff lost a lot of ground in two weeks. Something big has to happen soon.

Linehan’s Status
By Bernie Miklasz
Sun Sep 28, 2008

suppose that the players’ take their (mostly) silent rebellion to the next level? Suppose there’s a hostile meeting between Linehan and the owner, Chip Rosenbloom?

Linehan's future as bleak as Rams' second half
By Jeff Gordon
STLTODAY.COM SPORTS COLUMNIST
Sunday, Sep. 28 2008

Linehan tried to muscle up this week. He cut cornerback Fakhir Brown -- who has been recovering from a shoulder injury -– and forced struggling Tye Hill back into the starting lineup.

He benched battered Marc Bulger and named Trent Green the new starting quarterback. In response, Bulger told others in the organization that he didn’t want to play for Linehan any more, sources told the Post-Dispatch.

Jackson weighed in on his behalf, telling a radio audience that he disagreed with the benching -– and that some of his teammates agreed with him.

Second-half collapse fits Rams pattern
By Bernie Miklasz
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Monday, Sep. 29 2008

Green was the coach's hand-picked quarterback for this game, inserted after Linehan benched starter Marc Bulger -- apparently against the wishes of many Rams players and offensive coordinator Al Saunders.

In the locker room, Linehan paused to stop by Trent Green's locker. "Thanks for battling out there," Linehan told the quarterback. There wasn't much interaction as players went about their postgame rounds, largely ignoring the head coach.

Gordo Chat
Mon Sep 29, 2008

I heard a story late last night on ESPN that Scott Linehan looked into trading Torry Holt, mostly due tot he fact that they do not get along. Have you heard anything about this?

Thanks!

-Shawn in Colorado

Jeff Gordon: We've seen and heard about a lot of similar stuff this week. Brown's cut came out of left field, nobody would be shocked if more stuff was going on. Scott doesn't have the juice to move Holt. He did, however, have the juice to move Brown. On the "releasing players" front, he must have been tempted to turn Bulger loose after Marc reportedly told people he didn't want to play for Scott any more. But, again, Scott didn't have much juice.

Rams' Long learning hard lessons in rookie season
By Steve Wyche | NFL.com
Fri Oct 3, 2008

Compounded with an 0-4 start and the mixed feelings some players had toward Linehan, things were unhealthy.

This kind of stuff, if it is happening, is always easy to find out about. 53 plus injured reserve and the practice squad--that's a lot of guys.

So this whole "well of course no one speaks out" line is going nowhere. That's not how things work. If a team rejects its coach, that kind of thing is always easy to find out about. It's not the kind of thing that can be kept quiet.

So all that and just 2 players make a "TEAM"? :lmao:

 

[Faceplant]

I'm with ZN on this one. That team completely quit on Linehan. In fact, I think they pretty much quit on him in 2007 after Linehan criticized Bruce and wouldn't take any advice from the players. But, I never did see the Rams quit on Spags.

Again, a totally different roster that had been achieved success in the league. Half of this roster is lucky to have a friggin job in the NFL at all. Doesn't surprise me that they have kept quiet for the most part....

"Not quitting" and "keeping quiet" are different things. And in terms of half the roster being lucky to have a job? Well how many Linehan guys survived to make the 2009 roster? I don't think it was even HALF.

Yet it was easy to tell at the time that the team did not respect Linehan. Players say things off the record (and actually in 2008 Jackson said something ON the record), reporters see the locker room, the average fan can tell when a team is quitting.

Earlier I did a little quick and lazy research and it was easy to come up with a few examples. And I wasn't trying hard:

Gordo Chat
Sunday, September 14, 2008

The veterans know this team is doomed. They battled OK for most of the game. But the cave-in at the end was discouraging to say the least. How does the team come back from that? This staff lost a lot of ground in two weeks. Something big has to happen soon.

Linehan’s Status
By Bernie Miklasz
Sun Sep 28, 2008

suppose that the players’ take their (mostly) silent rebellion to the next level? Suppose there’s a hostile meeting between Linehan and the owner, Chip Rosenbloom?

Linehan's future as bleak as Rams' second half
By Jeff Gordon
STLTODAY.COM SPORTS COLUMNIST
Sunday, Sep. 28 2008

Linehan tried to muscle up this week. He cut cornerback Fakhir Brown -- who has been recovering from a shoulder injury -– and forced struggling Tye Hill back into the starting lineup.

He benched battered Marc Bulger and named Trent Green the new starting quarterback. In response, Bulger told others in the organization that he didn’t want to play for Linehan any more, sources told the Post-Dispatch.

Jackson weighed in on his behalf, telling a radio audience that he disagreed with the benching -– and that some of his teammates agreed with him.

Second-half collapse fits Rams pattern
By Bernie Miklasz
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Monday, Sep. 29 2008

Green was the coach's hand-picked quarterback for this game, inserted after Linehan benched starter Marc Bulger -- apparently against the wishes of many Rams players and offensive coordinator Al Saunders.

In the locker room, Linehan paused to stop by Trent Green's locker. "Thanks for battling out there," Linehan told the quarterback. There wasn't much interaction as players went about their postgame rounds, largely ignoring the head coach.

Gordo Chat
Mon Sep 29, 2008

I heard a story late last night on ESPN that Scott Linehan looked into trading Torry Holt, mostly due tot he fact that they do not get along. Have you heard anything about this?

Thanks!

-Shawn in Colorado

Jeff Gordon: We've seen and heard about a lot of similar stuff this week. Brown's cut came out of left field, nobody would be shocked if more stuff was going on. Scott doesn't have the juice to move Holt. He did, however, have the juice to move Brown. On the "releasing players" front, he must have been tempted to turn Bulger loose after Marc reportedly told people he didn't want to play for Scott any more. But, again, Scott didn't have much juice.

Rams' Long learning hard lessons in rookie season
By Steve Wyche | NFL.com
Fri Oct 3, 2008

Compounded with an 0-4 start and the mixed feelings some players had toward Linehan, things were unhealthy.

This kind of stuff, if it is happening, is always easy to find out about. 53 plus injured reserve and the practice squad--that's a lot of guys.

So this whole "well of course no one speaks out" line is going nowhere. That's not how things work. If a team rejects its coach, that kind of thing is always easy to find out about. It's not the kind of thing that can be kept quiet.

Oh please, a bunch of PD media quotes?? Think there was an agenda there?? I generally agree with you on many topics, but I have to disagree here. In the end, it really doesn't matter whether or not our perceptions of "quitting" on a coach are similar. The fact is that Linny and Spags combined for a 21-65 record...21 and 65!!! Throw Hasbeen (whom the players petitioned for!!) in there and it gets even uglier @ 23-75. It really doesn't matter what the players think of their coach when they cannot compete on the field. I am genuinely excited about Fisher, but I expect him to be held accountable if the incompetence continues under his watch....much as Spags was.

 

[Stranger]

It's possible others may come forward at some point in time, but what does it really matter? The general consensus after Spags was fired (from the players still on the team) was that he was a good guy, and many of the players loved him. Many more came over from other teams just to be with him too. Was he perfect? Nah. Did he make some mistakes, or maybe run too tight a ship? Yeah, probably. But I, personally, see no point in trying to throw the guy under the bus and then back up over him. What's done is done. I don't think anyone here doubts that the guy did everything he could to try and turn this Franchise around. Conspiracy theories aside, he was committed to forming and shaping this team into a specific mold. At the worst possible time, and under the worst possible circumstances.

It didn't work out. It happens. Karney has his views, other players have theirs. I mean if JL and Mikell have nothing but great things to say, do we summarily discount anything Karney says? Or vice-versa? Nah. It's all varying degrees of perception and personal feelings mixed up into a big potpourri of who gives a shit.

Wow, there's that "phrase" again. What does it even mean? Seems as it comes into play when someone has a different view or perspective than the prevailing view proposed by the carefully orchestrated PR - media industry.

Yeah, I didn't mean it that way. I meant conspiracy theories in the broadest sense. As in, what Karney says, or what Spags did, or any other mind-reading proclamation that has no basis in truth. Only speculation. See, we don't *know* if Karney is jilted and trying to exact revenge, or *why* Spags did some of the things he did to alienate people. We can only speculate because we're not occupying their minds. So I eliminated those things from my retort and only focused on what we *know* to be the case. He tried, and he came up short. There are reasons, and there are assumptions.

I still don't see the point in trying to muddy the waters with things we don't *know* in an attempt to further discredit the efforts put forth by the previous regime. Lots of coaches do a lot of goofy things. None of them (and this is fact) do them to purposefully sabotage their own futures.

I think we should look forward now. I'm over Spagnuolo, and I'm WAY over Linehan.

I'm not trying to bash the previous regime, or Spags, that's not my goal here, really. I think you have seen that I'm open minded, as you were previously able to convert me from a supporter-of-regime-change to a Spags-supporter. But that same open mindedness is in-play now. Hence, I'm not going to be quick to discount Hewitt's or MK's comments, nor try to rationalize why they are making their comments. I'm going to take-in their data-points, just like I'm trying to take-in all the data, and then see where that information takes me.

Right now, I think there is reason to believe that Spags was a good coach who had a vast loyal following. However, I also think there is reason to believe that Spags was also insecure in his first HC gig, and that insecurity manifested itself in ways that certainliy turned-off some in the building.

Like the Martz affair, I think we'll continue to discuss the Spags regime, and debate its impact, becuase it is now an official part of Rams history. And just like all Rams history, it's going to continue to have a place on this forum. So, I don't think we're going to be able to 'get-away' from this discussion, eventhought it may be uncomfortable.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Right now, I think there is reason to believe that Spags was a good coach who had a vast loyal following. However, I also think there is reason to believe that Spags was also insecure in his first HC gig, and that insecurity manifested itself in ways that certainliy turned-off some in the building.

I would agree with that for the most part. There's a lot of little things about being a HC that can make it hard the first time around. I think Spags gets another shot in 2-3 years and I think he'll be a great HC. I wish it would have been with us, but that doesn't look like the case. He's a good guy and a great coach. Once he learns more little details (as well as the lessons from his time here) he'll be fine. I like Spags, I wish him the best of luck.

 

[-X-]

I'm not trying to bash the previous regime, or Spags, that's not my goal here, really. I think you have seen that I'm open minded, as you were previously able to convert me from a supporter-of-regime-change to a Spags-supporter. But that same open mindedness is in-play now. Hence, I'm not going to be quick to discount Hewitt's or MK's comments, nor try to rationalize why they are making their comments. I'm going to take-in their data-points, just like I'm trying to take-in all the data, and then see where that information takes me.

Right now, I think there is reason to believe that Spags was a good coach who had a vast loyal following. However, I also think there is reason to believe that Spags was also insecure in his first HC gig, and that insecurity manifested itself in ways that certainliy turned-off some in the building.

Like the Martz affair, I think we'll continue to discuss the Spags regime, and debate its impact, becuase it is now an official part of Rams history. And just like all Rams history, it's going to continue to have a place on this forum. So, I don't think we're going to be able to 'get-away' from this discussion, eventhought it may be uncomfortable.

I know, man. You know I have respect for your opinion and position on things. Obviously Spags is going to be discussed for a few years, as Linehan still has his place in Rams lore. I'm just not seeing the benefit of trying to assign motives to a coach (or players) under the previous regime when we have nothing to base it on. I'm not going to try and squash conversation in this either. That's one of the things that we intend to change about this forum. The only thing I want is for people to respect each other's opinion, and take into account that the "other guy" has put a lot of thought into forming his argument (for lack of a better word). As such, it should be a priority to try and debate only that argument through thoughtful and insightful retorts.

Like you said, Spags had kind of a cult following. Obviously that's because people respected the fact that he took on this job when it was pretty evident that it was a monumental task with heavy odds tilted toward failure. He was also one of the more (if not the most) highly sought-after coach in the league at the time. He fucked up, but many think it was by way of things outside his control. Others think he had a heavy hand in his own demise. It's all good. I just don't think that we should take the words of a player who was cut (for scheme purposes) and make them the final word on how things transpired as a whole.

But.... that's just me. You're all free to discuss it at length of course. Do so intelligently and respectful is the only thing I ask.

 

[Stranger]

Right now, I think there is reason to believe that Spags was a good coach who had a vast loyal following. However, I also think there is reason to believe that Spags was also insecure in his first HC gig, and that insecurity manifested itself in ways that certainliy turned-off some in the building.

I would agree with that for the most part. There's a lot of little things about being a HC that can make it hard the first time around. I think Spags gets another shot in 2-3 years and I think he'll be a great HC. I wish it would have been with us, but that doesn't look like the case. He's a good guy and a great coach. Once he learns more little details (as well as the lessons from his time here) he'll be fine. I like Spags, I wish him the best of luck.

If I'm right about him, then he's going to have to overcome his insecurities to be a great HC next time. That's what Vermeil had to do. Ultimately, Vermeil matured, hired good people, and let them do what they do. If Spags can't overcome the inner demons that cause his insecurity, then I fear he won't be as great as he could be, nor do I think he'll be able to be a successful HC.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm with ZN on this one. That team completely quit on Linehan. In fact, I think they pretty much quit on him in 2007 after Linehan criticized Bruce and wouldn't take any advice from the players. But, I never did see the Rams quit on Spags.

Again, a totally different roster that had been achieved success in the league. Half of this roster is lucky to have a friggin job in the NFL at all. Doesn't surprise me that they have kept quiet for the most part....

"Not quitting" and "keeping quiet" are different things. And in terms of half the roster being lucky to have a job? Well how many Linehan guys survived to make the 2009 roster? I don't think it was even HALF.

Yet it was easy to tell at the time that the team did not respect Linehan. Players say things off the record (and actually in 2008 Jackson said something ON the record), reporters see the locker room, the average fan can tell when a team is quitting.

Earlier I did a little quick and lazy research and it was easy to come up with a few examples. And I wasn't trying hard:

Gordo Chat
Sunday, September 14, 2008

The veterans know this team is doomed. They battled OK for most of the game. But the cave-in at the end was discouraging to say the least. How does the team come back from that? This staff lost a lot of ground in two weeks. Something big has to happen soon.

Linehan’s Status
By Bernie Miklasz
Sun Sep 28, 2008

suppose that the players’ take their (mostly) silent rebellion to the next level? Suppose there’s a hostile meeting between Linehan and the owner, Chip Rosenbloom?

Linehan's future as bleak as Rams' second half
By Jeff Gordon
STLTODAY.COM SPORTS COLUMNIST
Sunday, Sep. 28 2008

Linehan tried to muscle up this week. He cut cornerback Fakhir Brown -- who has been recovering from a shoulder injury -– and forced struggling Tye Hill back into the starting lineup.

He benched battered Marc Bulger and named Trent Green the new starting quarterback. In response, Bulger told others in the organization that he didn’t want to play for Linehan any more, sources told the Post-Dispatch.

Jackson weighed in on his behalf, telling a radio audience that he disagreed with the benching -– and that some of his teammates agreed with him.

Second-half collapse fits Rams pattern
By Bernie Miklasz
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Monday, Sep. 29 2008

Green was the coach's hand-picked quarterback for this game, inserted after Linehan benched starter Marc Bulger -- apparently against the wishes of many Rams players and offensive coordinator Al Saunders.

In the locker room, Linehan paused to stop by Trent Green's locker. "Thanks for battling out there," Linehan told the quarterback. There wasn't much interaction as players went about their postgame rounds, largely ignoring the head coach.

Gordo Chat
Mon Sep 29, 2008

I heard a story late last night on ESPN that Scott Linehan looked into trading Torry Holt, mostly due tot he fact that they do not get along. Have you heard anything about this?

Thanks!

-Shawn in Colorado

Jeff Gordon: We've seen and heard about a lot of similar stuff this week. Brown's cut came out of left field, nobody would be shocked if more stuff was going on. Scott doesn't have the juice to move Holt. He did, however, have the juice to move Brown. On the "releasing players" front, he must have been tempted to turn Bulger loose after Marc reportedly told people he didn't want to play for Scott any more. But, again, Scott didn't have much juice.

Rams' Long learning hard lessons in rookie season
By Steve Wyche | NFL.com
Fri Oct 3, 2008

Compounded with an 0-4 start and the mixed feelings some players had toward Linehan, things were unhealthy.

This kind of stuff, if it is happening, is always easy to find out about. 53 plus injured reserve and the practice squad--that's a lot of guys.

So this whole "well of course no one speaks out" line is going nowhere. That's not how things work. If a team rejects its coach, that kind of thing is always easy to find out about. It's not the kind of thing that can be kept quiet.

Oh please, a bunch of PD media quotes?? Think there was an agenda there?? I generally agree with you on many topics, but I have to disagree here. In the end, it really doesn't matter whether or not our perceptions of "quitting" on a coach are similar. The fact is that Linny and Spags combined for a 21-65 record...21 and 65!!! Throw Hasbeen (whom the players petitioned for!!) in there and it gets even uglier @ 23-75. It really doesn't matter what the players think of their coach when they cannot compete on the field. I am genuinely excited about Fisher, but I expect him to be held accountable if the incompetence continues under his watch....much as Spags was.

No there was no agenda there.

And if anything, the PD guys couldn't STAND Spags. He cut off access; he fired their Leak Guy, Todd...so in fact there WAS an agenda with HIM.

Fact is--and pick any example you want from any point in NFL history (cause it's all searchable)--when a team turns on a coach, it is no big secret.

...

 

[Anonymous]

I'm with ZN on this one. That team completely quit on Linehan. In fact, I think they pretty much quit on him in 2007 after Linehan criticized Bruce and wouldn't take any advice from the players. But, I never did see the Rams quit on Spags.

Again, a totally different roster that had been achieved success in the league. Half of this roster is lucky to have a friggin job in the NFL at all. Doesn't surprise me that they have kept quiet for the most part....

"Not quitting" and "keeping quiet" are different things. And in terms of half the roster being lucky to have a job? Well how many Linehan guys survived to make the 2009 roster? I don't think it was even HALF.

Yet it was easy to tell at the time that the team did not respect Linehan. Players say things off the record (and actually in 2008 Jackson said something ON the record), reporters see the locker room, the average fan can tell when a team is quitting.

Earlier I did a little quick and lazy research and it was easy to come up with a few examples. And I wasn't trying hard:

Gordo Chat
Sunday, September 14, 2008

The veterans know this team is doomed. They battled OK for most of the game. But the cave-in at the end was discouraging to say the least. How does the team come back from that? This staff lost a lot of ground in two weeks. Something big has to happen soon.

Linehan’s Status
By Bernie Miklasz
Sun Sep 28, 2008

suppose that the players’ take their (mostly) silent rebellion to the next level? Suppose there’s a hostile meeting between Linehan and the owner, Chip Rosenbloom?

Linehan's future as bleak as Rams' second half
By Jeff Gordon
STLTODAY.COM SPORTS COLUMNIST
Sunday, Sep. 28 2008

Linehan tried to muscle up this week. He cut cornerback Fakhir Brown -- who has been recovering from a shoulder injury -– and forced struggling Tye Hill back into the starting lineup.

He benched battered Marc Bulger and named Trent Green the new starting quarterback. In response, Bulger told others in the organization that he didn’t want to play for Linehan any more, sources told the Post-Dispatch.

Jackson weighed in on his behalf, telling a radio audience that he disagreed with the benching -– and that some of his teammates agreed with him.

Second-half collapse fits Rams pattern
By Bernie Miklasz
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Monday, Sep. 29 2008

Green was the coach's hand-picked quarterback for this game, inserted after Linehan benched starter Marc Bulger -- apparently against the wishes of many Rams players and offensive coordinator Al Saunders.

In the locker room, Linehan paused to stop by Trent Green's locker. "Thanks for battling out there," Linehan told the quarterback. There wasn't much interaction as players went about their postgame rounds, largely ignoring the head coach.

Gordo Chat
Mon Sep 29, 2008

I heard a story late last night on ESPN that Scott Linehan looked into trading Torry Holt, mostly due to he fact that they do not get along. Have you heard anything about this?

Thanks!

-Shawn in Colorado

Jeff Gordon: We've seen and heard about a lot of similar stuff this week. Brown's cut came out of left field, nobody would be shocked if more stuff was going on. Scott doesn't have the juice to move Holt. He did, however, have the juice to move Brown. On the "releasing players" front, he must have been tempted to turn Bulger loose after Marc reportedly told people he didn't want to play for Scott any more. But, again, Scott didn't have much juice.

Rams' Long learning hard lessons in rookie season
By Steve Wyche | NFL.com
Fri Oct 3, 2008

Compounded with an 0-4 start and the mixed feelings some players had toward Linehan, things were unhealthy.

This kind of stuff, if it is happening, is always easy to find out about. 53 plus injured reserve and the practice squad--that's a lot of guys.

So this whole "well of course no one speaks out" line is going nowhere. That's not how things work. If a team rejects its coach, that kind of thing is always easy to find out about. It's not the kind of thing that can be kept quiet.

So all that and just 2 players make a "TEAM"? :lmao:

First off, the point of the post is to respond to people who claim (erroneously) that when a team turns on a coach, no one speaks out. Well, yeah, they do. And that's an old fact about the NFL. It's just not a secret.

As for your..."counter-argument," as it were...read more closely.

suppose that the players take their (mostly) silent rebellion to the next level

Linehan benched starter Marc Bulger -- apparently against the wishes of many Rams players

There wasn't much interaction as players went about their postgame rounds, largely ignoring the head coach

We've seen and heard about a lot of similar stuff this week.

Compounded with an 0-4 start and the mixed feelings some players had toward Linehan, things were unhealthy.

When a coach is losing ground with his own team, it is never hard to find out about it.

Now I found that stuff in one half-hearted lazy search where in advance I knew I only wanted a handful of examples.

If other players feel like Karney does, where is the buzz. Where's the evidence of it.

Cause anyone sitting at a keyboard can make up stuff in their own heads that echoes what they already believe.

But there IS a buzz when a coach loses a team...so where is that buzz with Spags.

 

[Anonymous]

Fact is--and pick any example you want from any point in NFL history (cause it's all searchable)--when a team turns on a coach, it is no big secret.

...

All searchable? I searched your term

"when a [NFL] team turns on a coach"

and couldn't find anything. :cmon:

 

[-X-]

Fact is--and pick any example you want from any point in NFL history (cause it's all searchable)--when a team turns on a coach, it is no big secret.

...

All searchable? I searched your term

"when a [NFL] team turns on a coach"

and couldn't find anything. :cmon:

Then clearly you're using the wrong search term. Are you debating whether or not players turned on Linehan? Because I have actual videos of that. As far as it happening throughout the history of the NFL - yeah, that's happened too. Just use a different search term.

Here.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=NFL+players+that+quit+on+the+coach

 

[Anonymous]

I'm with ZN on this one. That team completely quit on Linehan. In fact, I think they pretty much quit on him in 2007 after Linehan criticized Bruce and wouldn't take any advice from the players. But, I never did see the Rams quit on Spags.

Again, a totally different roster that had been achieved success in the league. Half of this roster is lucky to have a friggin job in the NFL at all. Doesn't surprise me that they have kept quiet for the most part....

"Not quitting" and "keeping quiet" are different things. And in terms of half the roster being lucky to have a job? Well how many Linehan guys survived to make the 2009 roster? I don't think it was even HALF.

Yet it was easy to tell at the time that the team did not respect Linehan. Players say things off the record (and actually in 2008 Jackson said something ON the record), reporters see the locker room, the average fan can tell when a team is quitting.

Earlier I did a little quick and lazy research and it was easy to come up with a few examples. And I wasn't trying hard:

Gordo Chat
Sunday, September 14, 2008

The veterans know this team is doomed. They battled OK for most of the game. But the cave-in at the end was discouraging to say the least. How does the team come back from that? This staff lost a lot of ground in two weeks. Something big has to happen soon.

Linehan’s Status
By Bernie Miklasz
Sun Sep 28, 2008

suppose that the players’ take their (mostly) silent rebellion to the next level? Suppose there’s a hostile meeting between Linehan and the owner, Chip Rosenbloom?

Linehan's future as bleak as Rams' second half
By Jeff Gordon
STLTODAY.COM SPORTS COLUMNIST
Sunday, Sep. 28 2008

Linehan tried to muscle up this week. He cut cornerback Fakhir Brown -- who has been recovering from a shoulder injury -– and forced struggling Tye Hill back into the starting lineup.

He benched battered Marc Bulger and named Trent Green the new starting quarterback. In response, Bulger told others in the organization that he didn’t want to play for Linehan any more, sources told the Post-Dispatch.

Jackson weighed in on his behalf, telling a radio audience that he disagreed with the benching -– and that some of his teammates agreed with him.

Second-half collapse fits Rams pattern
By Bernie Miklasz
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Monday, Sep. 29 2008

Green was the coach's hand-picked quarterback for this game, inserted after Linehan benched starter Marc Bulger -- apparently against the wishes of many Rams players and offensive coordinator Al Saunders.

In the locker room, Linehan paused to stop by Trent Green's locker. "Thanks for battling out there," Linehan told the quarterback. There wasn't much interaction as players went about their postgame rounds, largely ignoring the head coach.

Gordo Chat
Mon Sep 29, 2008

I heard a story late last night on ESPN that Scott Linehan looked into trading Torry Holt, mostly due to he fact that they do not get along. Have you heard anything about this?

Thanks!

-Shawn in Colorado

Jeff Gordon: We've seen and heard about a lot of similar stuff this week. Brown's cut came out of left field, nobody would be shocked if more stuff was going on. Scott doesn't have the juice to move Holt. He did, however, have the juice to move Brown. On the "releasing players" front, he must have been tempted to turn Bulger loose after Marc reportedly told people he didn't want to play for Scott any more. But, again, Scott didn't have much juice.

Rams' Long learning hard lessons in rookie season
By Steve Wyche | NFL.com
Fri Oct 3, 2008

Compounded with an 0-4 start and the mixed feelings some players had toward Linehan, things were unhealthy.

This kind of stuff, if it is happening, is always easy to find out about. 53 plus injured reserve and the practice squad--that's a lot of guys.

So this whole "well of course no one speaks out" line is going nowhere. That's not how things work. If a team rejects its coach, that kind of thing is always easy to find out about. It's not the kind of thing that can be kept quiet.

So all that and just 2 players make a "TEAM"? :lmao:

First off, the point of the post is to respond to people who claim (erroneously) that when a team turns on a coach, no one speaks out. Well, yeah, they do. And that's an old fact about the NFL. It's just not a secret.

As for your..."counter-argument," as it were...read more closely.

suppose that the players take their (mostly) silent rebellion to the next level

Linehan benched starter Marc Bulger -- apparently against the wishes of many Rams players

There wasn't much interaction as players went about their postgame rounds, largely ignoring the head coach

We've seen and heard about a lot of similar stuff this week.

Compounded with an 0-4 start and the mixed feelings some players had toward Linehan, things were unhealthy.

When a coach is losing ground with his own team, it is never hard to find out about it.

Now I found that stuff in one half-hearted lazy search where in advance I knew I only wanted a handful of examples.

If other players feel like Karney does, where is the buzz. Where's the evidence of it.

Cause anyone sitting at a keyboard can make up stuff in their own heads that echoes what they already believe.

But there IS a buzz when a coach loses a team...so where is that buzz with Spags.

Admit it....you've been caught doing your old schtick again and no amount of your posting pages per post of obfuscation will change the fact that you claimed "TEAM" yet can't provide more than two players.

 

[Anonymous]

Fact is--and pick any example you want from any point in NFL history (cause it's all searchable)--when a team turns on a coach, it is no big secret.

...

All searchable? I searched your term

"when a [NFL] team turns on a coach"

and couldn't find anything. :cmon:

Then clearly you're using the wrong search term. Are you debating whether or not players turned on Linehan? Because I have actual videos of that. As far as it happening throughout the history of the NFL - yeah, that's happened too. Just use a different search term.

Here.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=NFL+players+that+quit+on+the+coach

I used his term given. At issue is his use of the word "TEAM". I asked earlier for his definition which he would not provide. Is it 100% of the team? 50.1%? Or is it merely 2 players?

 

[-X-]

Admit it....you've been caught doing your old schtick again and no amount of your posting pages per post of obfuscation will change the fact that you claimed "TEAM" yet can't provide more than two players.

You're missing the point, Squeak. There are very real differences between what happened under Linehan, and what happened under Spagnuolo. Regarding your other posts, I think you're getting too hung up on semantics here. But that's just my observation.

 

[Anonymous]

Admit it....you've been caught doing your old schtick again and no amount of your posting pages per post of obfuscation will change the fact that you claimed "TEAM" yet can't provide more than two players.

You're missing the point, Squeak. There are very real differences between what happened under Linehan, and what happened under Spagnuolo. Regarding your other posts, I think you're getting too hung up on semantics here. But that's just my observation.

Well those posts are now a heck of a lot of scrolling away....but at issue is his contention that players that speak out negatively in the press towards a coach are not ostracized. That's pure fantasy IMO. The example he gives is only 2 players, both the highest paid vets at that time and both out of reach of the coach.

 

[-X-]

Admit it....you've been caught doing your old schtick again and no amount of your posting pages per post of obfuscation will change the fact that you claimed "TEAM" yet can't provide more than two players.

You're missing the point, Squeak. There are very real differences between what happened under Linehan, and what happened under Spagnuolo. Regarding your other posts, I think you're getting too hung up on semantics here. But that's just my observation.

Well those posts are now a heck of a lot of scrolling away....but at issue is his contention that players that speak out negatively in the press towards a coach are not ostracized. That's pure fantasy IMO. The example he gives is only 2 players, both the highest paid vets at that time and both out of reach of the coach.

Well, maybe they are - maybe they aren't. Like you said, it depends on circumstance. That said, has there been even one other player that has chastised Spagnuolo even remotely to the extent that Karney has? One? I think that's the crux of the issue here. We saw *several* players openly mock, decry, defy, and even flat out state that Linehan was out of touch with the team. I think that's the main point here.

Uh.... I think.

 

[Anonymous]

Admit it....you've been caught doing your old schtick again and no amount of your posting pages per post of obfuscation will change the fact that you claimed "TEAM" yet can't provide more than two players.

You're missing the point, Squeak. There are very real differences between what happened under Linehan, and what happened under Spagnuolo. Regarding your other posts, I think you're getting too hung up on semantics here. But that's just my observation.

Well those posts are now a heck of a lot of scrolling away....but at issue is his contention that players that speak out negatively in the press towards a coach are not ostracized. That's pure fantasy IMO. The example he gives is only 2 players, both the highest paid vets at that time and both out of reach of the coach.

Well, maybe they are - maybe they aren't. Like you said, it depends on circumstance. That said, has there been even one other player that has chastised Spagnuolo even remotely to the extent that Karney has? One? I think that's the crux of the issue here. We saw *several* players openly mock, decry, defy, and even flat out state that Linehan was out of touch with the team. I think that's the main point here.

Uh.... I think.

And as I've said earlier.....time will tell.