Quick?

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

tahoe

Pro Bowler
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
1,664
Does anyone know why the heck Brian Quick didn't play yesterday?
 

TheDYVKX

#TeamMcVay
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Messages
4,703
Name
Sean McVay
Fisher said on his radio show last week they were going to take it slow with him, or something to that effect. We have WR depth, don't need to rush him. I'm sure he's fine.
 

Debacled

Starter
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
571
Was due to who they were gonna have to use for ST play. With Cunningham essentially starting at RB they had to bring someone else in to help on ST (that being Marquez) not to mention Bates being out as well.

Quick was the odd man out. Probably doesn't hurt to give him another week to get back into the swing of things, it hasn't been that long since he was cleared for contact.
 

bskrilla

Starter
Joined
Aug 6, 2013
Messages
741
He wasn't on the injury report. Our speculation is that they needed more people to play ST with Benny and Pead being the top two RB's. You don't want your # 1 and 2 RB's playing on all the ST units.

It likely came down to Marquez or Quick and they needed the bodies for ST. Quick doesn't play ST and especially not while he's so fresh off that injury. It was a good thing too because Marquez was a STud yesterday.
 

bwdenverram

Legend
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
5,497
Name
BW
Fisher said on his radio show last week they were going to take it slow with him, or something to that effect. We have WR depth, don't need to rush him. I'm sure he's fine.

Yeah but what I don't get is if you cleared him 100% in practice and the doctors say he's ready, what exactly are we waiting for?

He's going to get hit at one point so waiting won't make a difference unless he's NOT 100% healed.
 

bwdenverram

Legend
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
5,497
Name
BW
Yeah but what I don't get is if you cleared him 100% in practice and the doctors say he's ready, what exactly are we waiting for?

He's going to get hit at one point so waiting won't make a difference unless he's NOT 100% healed.

If it's a special teams deal I get that but Quick is also the best blocking WR we have.
 

TheDYVKX

#TeamMcVay
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Messages
4,703
Name
Sean McVay
Yeah but what I don't get is if you cleared him 100% in practice and the doctors say he's ready, what exactly are we waiting for?

He's going to get hit at one point so waiting won't make a difference unless he's NOT 100% healed.

Hey, I don't know, maybe he is not 100%, not fully. It might have something to do with the STs that other posters brought up. We'll see if if Fisher says anything on it.
 

bskrilla

Starter
Joined
Aug 6, 2013
Messages
741
If it's a special teams deal I get that but Quick is also the best blocking WR we have.

Sure maybe on offense, but he doesn't play ST. And they needed people to play ST. Might as well give him 1 more week of healing when we had needs elsewhere.
 

tahoe

Pro Bowler
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
1,664
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
I kinda get the ST argument but he is still the best WR on the team and how can you sacrifice offense for ST?
 

bwdenverram

Legend
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
5,497
Name
BW
Sure maybe on offense, but he doesn't play ST. And they needed people to play ST. Might as well give him 1 more week of healing when we had needs elsewhere.

That's what I meant though. If they inactivated him because they needed another ST player I get it..
 

bwdenverram

Legend
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
5,497
Name
BW
Hey, I don't know, maybe he is not 100%, not fully. It might have something to do with the STs that other posters brought up. We'll see if if Fisher says anything on it.
Yup, we'll see. Maybe he isn't 100%.
I'm just antsy to get all of our #1's on the field :)
 

Athos

Legend
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
5,933
I kinda get the ST argument but he is still the best WR on the team and how can you sacrifice offense for ST?

Well, I think that on-side kick (and yes, Peteyboy is a lying POS. That was an onside FAIL, not a pooch) proves why an extra ST/Hands guy was necessary.
 

tahoe

Pro Bowler
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
1,664
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #14
Well, I think that on-side kick (and yes, Peteyboy is a lying POS. That was an onside FAIL, not a pooch) proves why an extra ST/Hands guy was necessary.
one could argue that they wouldn't even be in OT if Quick was playing...
 

tahoe

Pro Bowler
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
1,664
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #15
And Im all for Marquez being on the game day roster I just don't understand why Quick wasn't.