Accountability is the theme of the day.

  • 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.
Dog said:
huh?????

what has Gurley got to do with Tavon muffing punts? Several times. What does Tavons TD run have to do with this topic?

Whats your point here? Are you suggesting that the Rams allow Tavon to continue to "try" to field punts because another player fumbled or didnt run for yards in the 2nd half?

wowwwwww what an argument you posed.
Click to expand...

Point_over_your_head.jpg


.
 
Dog said:
Yeah ok. That your final answer?

Very humble of you.
Click to expand...

if you want to find my answer go back and read the conversation from the point i ask merlin how tavon's fumble contributed to the loss.

.
 
Ram_Rally said:

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/MylesASimmons/status/917543389930831873




Moe Alexander is cut and now tavon takes another demotion. Do your job or have a seat it seems.
Click to expand...


Called it. I mentioned this on the Mo being cut thread. It was purely speculation, but exactly what I would have done.

Jason's role is dwindling. Once McVay was hired I said that there was not a good fit for Tavon in his offense. Once the receiving Corp was revamped, even Tavon saw it. McVay is using him as an RB but it really seems that his limitations will decide his fate.
 
kurtfaulk said:
if you want to find my answer go back and read the conversation from the point i ask merlin how tavon's fumble contributed to the loss.

.
Click to expand...

The fumble absolutely contributed to the loss. I see where fellow members posted a little this and that to the contrary, but its all just covering a pile of poop with some Lysol. Each negative play contributes in its own way. Tavons was no different than any other. That turnover shares no more or no less blame than another. Sum it all up and it was a team loss, but the individual parts did contribute.

I suppose you could say your point went over my head because I see no reason to bring up another player, or any other play for that matter, when discussing the validity of Tavon losing his punt return responsibilities. There is a point however, to saying that the muffed punt contibuted to the loss. Minor contribution, but still....arguing that player "a" also fumbled therefore player "b's" fumble cant be the issue seems pretty pointless to me.

I dont buy the momentum swingback argument either. We were running up and down the field on their vaunted defense, having drivin the length of the field 2 out of 3 possesions. Holding that ball and starting another effective drive could have been demoralizing to them. Instead, they get the ball back and at that point they are no longer demoralized and losing thier spirit.

And really....none of this has much to do with the overall feeling that Tavon lost the job on more than one event anyway.

Not to worry...Coach said it was "a little break". We all know thats the same as being laid off instead of fired. Perhaps he'll be called back to the production lines soon. Perhaps the next guy muffs his own self out of a job then Tavon comes back in, runs a few back and we all live hgappily ever after.
 
Dog said:
The fumble absolutely contributed to the loss. I see where fellow members posted a little this and that to the contrary, but its all just covering a pile of poop with some Lysol. Each negative play contributes in its own way. Tavons was no different than any other. That turnover shares no more or no less blame than another. Sum it all up and it was a team loss, but the individual parts did contribute.

I suppose you could say your point went over my head because I see no reason to bring up another player, or any other play for that matter, when discussing the validity of Tavon losing his punt return responsibilities. There is a point however, to saying that the muffed punt contibuted to the loss. Minor contribution, but still....arguing that player "a" also fumbled therefore player "b's" fumble cant be the issue seems pretty pointless to me.

I dont buy the momentum swingback argument either. We were running up and down the field on their vaunted defense, having drivin the length of the field 2 out of 3 possesions. Holding that ball and starting another effective drive could have been demoralizing to them. Instead, they get the ball back and at that point they are no longer demoralized and losing thier spirit.

And really....none of this has much to do with the overall feeling that Tavon lost the job on more than one event anyway.

Not to worry...Coach said it was "a little break". We all know thats the same as being laid off instead of fired. Perhaps he'll be called back to the production lines soon. Perhaps the next guy muffs his own self out of a job then Tavon comes back in, runs a few back and we all live hgappily ever after.
Click to expand...

well, i don't appreciate someone calling tavon a knucklehead for muffing a punt return. so i gave him a real example of a knucklehead play, that being gurley botching a td run by being cute and turning the ball over. and how that contributed more to the loss.

my posts have nothing to do with tavon losing punt return duties.

.
 
Elmgrovegnome said:
Called it. I mentioned this on the Mo being cut thread. It was purely speculation, but exactly what I would have done.

Jason's role is dwindling. Once McVay was hired I said that there was not a good fit for Tavon in his offense. Once the receiving Corp was revamped, even Tavon saw it. McVay is using him as an RB but it really seems that his limitations will decide his fate.
Click to expand...
I used to like him as a returner. I'm not sure what happened
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back