Are the Rams a better team after Week 17 of 2014 than they were after Week 17 of 2013?

[Memphis Ram]

In the end but would you demand wins from Fisher in year 1? year 2? I think you just wanted improvement. Why? Because of the depth of disaster that was the Rams roster. Consider the amount of turnover that instantly took place. Then consider who was on the team when he took over and who is on the team now. The Rams have the youngest roster in the NFL for a reason. Because they were the absolute worst team in the NFL for years. Not just a bad team but the worst team. This isn't Bill OBrien taking over the Texans who recently had playoff appearances. This is a team that won 5 games in 3 years. So, if Bill OBrien gets 3 years to turn it around shouldn't Fisher get 5?

I think Kroenke lets Fisher play out his contract and then make a decision. Why? Because the team was beyond a mess and just hiring a new coach is like getting a new QB. It is very difficult. I prefer to stick to the plan that the Steelers and Patriots stick to and see how it plays out for once. Cowher had three losing seasons in a row between successes. But then he got back to the Superbowl. And everyone wants him to come out of retirement. Stick to the plan.

Besides I always despised the much overrated Parcells.

Oh. I'm not one to say that the Rams should replace Fisher this early. But, I'm also not going to go on and on about how improved a team with a 6-10 record is either.

 

[Ky Ram]

I appreciate all of the passion in this thread. Obviously we're all fans of this team and want to see the Rams do well.

For some there are all kinds of qualifiers that can define "better" outside of wins and losses, for others that isn't the case.

The fact is that we finished last in our division. If you look at all the other teams in our division I have a hard time buying that our roster doesn't compare or compete with all the other teams from a talent standpoint. The difference is they have found a way to win and we haven't.

We may have a more talent laden roster, better stats, be more competitive, but at the end of the day a better team would have a better record. You don't get to pick your schedule, your division, who gets hurt and who doesn't, you have to play the hand you're dealt.
For far too long we've lived by the wait till next year, we're almost there mantra. All that optimism needs to translate to W's- when that happens we'll be a better team.

 

[snackdaddy]

We have the worst record of Fisher's 3 year tenure. So no, we are not better. In fact, the record says we are worse.

I can see losing to the seahawks. But an ascending team doesn't lose to two previous home games.

I'm all in favor giving him another year. But if we're still the same I would not want to see a 5th year with him.

Just because we have more talent doesn't mean we have a better team. All it means is some of these guys will be getting a bigger check when their rookie contract is up.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Yes. We have more talent and we are better. However, it hasn't translated over to results.

I'd like to believe we are like the 2011 Seahawks who went 7-9 with an up and down season before "the light coming on".

We have a young roster. I think our window is just about to open.

 

[Rmfnlt]

I appreciate all of the passion in this thread. Obviously we're all fans of this team and want to see the Rams do well.

For some there are all kinds of qualifiers that can define "better" outside of wins and losses, for others that isn't the case.

The fact is that we finished last in our division. If you look at all the other teams in our division I have a hard time buying that our roster doesn't compare or compete with all the other teams from a talent standpoint. The difference is they have found a way to win and we haven't.

We may have a more talent laden roster, better stats, be more competitive, but at the end of the day a better team would have a better record. You don't get to pick your schedule, your division, who gets hurt and who doesn't, you have to play the hand you're dealt.
For far too long we've lived by the wait till next year, we're almost there mantra. All that optimism needs to translate to W's- when that happens we'll be a better team.

I think I see where you're going with this...

To me, the record is the cumulative effect of all the individual contributing factors, like:
* Execution
* Consistency
* Discipline

If you consistently execute and remain disciplined in your play, chances are... you win more than you lose.

The record is the sum of the parts... I think you have to look at it as the ultimate metric.

It's like saying the wheels (WRs) on a car are better than the ones you had last year.
And, the engine (RB)? That's better too.
But the car continues to break down because the suspension (execution) is shot and the roof is leaking (discipline).

The record is 6-10... that reflects deficiencies in all three important contributing factors.

The record last year was 7-9.

Improved?

 

[thirteen28]

I think in terms of talent on the roster, this team is most definitely better than at the same time last year.

In terms of playing disciplined, mistake-free (or minimized), no.