Black Monday Primer

[Mojo Ram]

Well, since the Rams have no franchise QB to depend on, nothing to worry about!

Seriously though......we're freaking boned at the QB position now. 2014 was the year to seriously address it. And seriously....2015/2016, hell, maybe even 2017....those classes look frighteningly bad.

Yeah right now the QB situation and immediate outlook is bleak. I'm not opposed to a stop gap veteran that may become available over the next six months or so either...until we can land a stud at some point. My thinking is that one of the things the Rams CAN control is coaching and front office stability, and continue to build through the draft. Keep building a great team, and when we do get that stud QB there'll be a helluva team around him.

I'm not saying that changes shouldn't be made along the way mind you, there is a valid debate in terms of what Shotty has accomplished(or hasn't accomplished) here in three years. I just feel pretty strongly that Fisher/Snead need more time. I feel like the defense is now in place(minus a couple upgrades and depth etc...). We seem to have some nice talent and stability on special teams as well.

The offense is slowly getting more talented. I have criticisms too. Re-signing Saffold. I don't think Tavon Austin is going to be the player that we all hoped he was going to be. There's still time but i'm skeptical. Maybe not such a great pick in hindsight...and costly. Then like you said, they put too much faith into Bradford this season. It was very risky and they got burned. Sucks. That is a major setback but i look at the talent on this team(especially on offense) compared to a few years ago and it's not even close.

One last thing. There's no way on Earth to accurately forecast the QB talent coming out two, three years from now. The draftniks who claim they can see that might as well become weathermen. They have no clue. It's in anticipation of playing a guessing game while blindfolded with a crystal ball.
Hell, things will change in relation to the current class coming out after workouts, combine etc. I'm not worried about any of that stuff.

 

[Rams and Gators]

I still hate that organizations have allowed themselves to have their destiny shaped by whether or not they have a "franchise" QB when there are simply so few in existence. And even if you think you have a decent starter, you season can still be jeopardy if he gets hurt. Sad.

With a loss tomorrow, Jeff Fisher's Rams might have even been 5-11 with a decent goal line camera angle in San Francisco.

And we could be 7-9 if there was some sort of rule about offensive lineman grabbing hold of defensive lineman (I'd call it something catchy like "holding").

 

[Mojo Ram]

Thing of it is, that continuity, that trust exists because they are winning. Mike Tomlin has not had a losing season yet. Bill Cowher started out with six straight. Belichick had delivered a SB to New England within two years(How long did Pete Carroll last there?). Mike Holmgren had eight winning seasons in a row with GB.

They're not winning because they have continuity, they have continuity because they're winning.

That's a chicken/egg argument i'm not willing to debate. I simply believe that establishing a groundwork is very important to long term, sustained success and at times...down years that are easily rebounded from DUE TO STABILITY...and having an excellent QB.

If you don't believe in this regime that's fine. I do.

 

[BuffaloRam]

So we roll the dice on SB8 next year - he stays healthy and we are sitting pretty at 10-6 in the division. This team will be a strong team next year, if we can shore up the O-Line.

 

[CoachO]

Agreed. Hence my comment on this team not KNOWING winning anymore. They just don't. Which is why they don't seem to have a killer instinct in finishing off games a lot of the time or dealing with adversity very well because....their entire NFL careers have been losing careers. Not even break even seasons.

It's great we aren't getting blown the crap out anymore, but losing is still losing at the end of the day and we're staring at the business end of a 6-10 season with the Hags playing for the DIV.

Having a worse season on what should have at least been 8-8 with this defense.....meh. Maybe I'm still bitter about not getting a QB this year when we should have, but.....False hope does that to you.

How quickly we seem to forget...... Is this defense not as responsible for the W/L record as the offense? Lest we forget how bad they were the first month of the season? Getting embarrassed by a BAD Minnesota team week one? Surrendering 30+ points to Philadelphia? Squandering big leads in games vs. Dallas & SF. And this past week getting shredded by a very average Giants offense? Sure they played over their heads for a 6 week period. But to say this team "should be at least 8-8 with this defense", IMO, seems to be giving them way too much credit for an entire season, when in fact, its more like 6 games where they carried this team.

You seem very bitter about OUR QB situation, while lamenting on how the aforementioned teams all have their franchise guys in place long term. But we saw last year what Green Bay was without Rodgers for half the year. And what did they do to address their backup situation? If Brees were to go down in New Orleans, I seriously doubt they have an adequate replacement. Luck's replacement? R. Wilson's? Why didn't Arizona do more about their QB situation behind Palmer?

I think its fair to say that when ANY of these teams lose their STARTING QB the "plan" isn't ever going to be good enough for teams that are set up to win now. As the saying goes..... "if you have TWO Quarterbacks, you don't have A QB."

Look at the teams who seem to have questions about their starters who all seem to have "better backups" in place. Cleveland? Tampa Bay? Washington? I think you get my drift.

It seems to be perfect "second guessing" given how this actually played out. We can all be upset with the perception that Fisher and Snead didn't do more to "prepare" for what actually happened. But find me a team, including Green Bay, New England, Pittsburgh, New Orleans etc...... who entering the 2nd Half of the FIRST game of their season would be forced into playing their THIRD STRING Quarterback, would have had a plan in place for that.

As for "not getting a QB this year when we should have", what ROOKIE QB would have been better prepared to do more than what we have gotten? Even if they would have pulled the trigger on Bortles, just because, do yo honestly think he would have been a better option THIS YEAR then what they have? If you say yes, then we will agree to disagree.

 

[Boffo97]

It has been a total re-build for Fisher & Company,

It really, really hasn't (although I know you're far from the only one to hold this POV).

Fisher took this job in the first place because we weren't starting from ground zero but already had very good pieces in place (although eventually they'll all be replaced because it's just the nature of the game.) Sure, if you look at roster percentage, it's huge turnover there, but that approach treats Bradford the same as it does some special teams guy.

When Fisher came, we had Bradford, a declining SJax, Saffold, Kendricks, Quinn, Long and Laurinaitis in place. All highly drafted people still contributing (SJax doing so elsewhere, although he's likely retiring this year). I just can't call that a rebuild. Too many pieces were already in place. Coaches who are truly faced with a cupboards bare rebuild would KILL for that sort of situation, and it's why Fisher chose the Rams over the Dolphins. And I do note that this list includes two of the key pieces that you note were missing.

I know people are still going to disagree with me, but I respect their right to be wrong. Just consider it a vent from me more than anything else.

 

[tempests]

That's a chicken/egg argument i'm not willing to debate. I simply believe that establishing a groundwork is very important to long term, sustained success and at times...down years that are easily rebounded from DUE TO STABILITY...and having an excellent QB.

Fair enough.

For my part I believe success leads to sustained success, where losing begets losing.

 

[V3]

Isn't the Falcon's GM the same guy who mentored Les Snead?

I know they were together there but I'm not sure how much he mentored Snead. I'm not a fan of Dimitroff. If you're going to give up all those picks, you have to be able to find talent later in the draft. They haven't. That's why they aren't very good any more.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I know people are still going to disagree with me

Indeed i do. The worst five year win/loss record in NFL history prior to Fisher arriving says otherwise. Even Jacksonville and Oakland have a few pieces in place. Are they rebuilding?

 

[Mojo Ram]

Fair enough.

For my part I believe success leads to sustained success, where losing begets losing.

I agree. I call that culture. We have a losing culture in place, and rebuilding every three years is no way to establish a winning culture.
IMO

 

[Boffo97]

Indeed i do. The worst five year win/loss record in NFL history prior to Fisher arriving says otherwise. Even Jacksonville and Oakland have a few pieces in place. Are they rebuilding?

I don't look at just W-L record. I look at the circumstances.

I think Fisher would agree that he came in with more places in piece than Jacksonville or Oakland have.

 

[Athos]

As for "not getting a QB this year when we should have", what ROOKIE QB would have been better prepared to do more than what we have gotten? Even if they would have pulled the trigger on Bortles, just because, do yo honestly think he would have been a better option THIS YEAR then what they have? If you say yes, then we will agree to disagree.

Don't care about burning that pick on Bortles. But it's nonsensical imo to think that Carr, and probably Bridgewater, wouldn't have won us more games in the long run. So yea, we'll have to disagree I guess. I think both are more talented by bar than Davis and most certainly possess more physical talent than Hill.

I think its fair to say that when ANY of these teams lose their STARTING QB the "plan" isn't ever going to be good enough for teams that are set up to win now. As the saying goes..... "if you have TWO Quarterbacks, you don't have A QB."

How many of those teams have been without their "franchise QB" for 31/64 games over the last 4 seasons? Near 50%. I actually love Bradford, but they gambled, and gambled poorly.

How quickly we seem to forget...... Is this defense not as responsible for the W/L record as the offense? Lest we forget how bad they were the first month of the season? Getting embarrassed by a BAD Minnesota team week one?

For MIN? Still reeling from losing cpt. #1 in Bradford for the year, and shortly into that game, cpt. #2 in Long.

Squandering big leads in games vs. Dallas & SF

14 points against the Whiners isn't a big lead, especially when the offense went into a shell after it's 2nd TD. The offense was a sad miserable baby's diaper in the 2nd half and I remember you tooting your horn against Davis after the fact. That and not and not running enough. That game

It seems to be perfect "second guessing" given how this actually played out.

BS. I wanted Garoppolo as a safety net in the 2nd.

 

[LesBaker]

Would love to read a well justified argument why?

It isn't hard to justify really, all of those teams have had more stable, more consistent and more productive QB play. It isn't even close unless you want to make a case for Sanchez and how he's played. Otherwise Dalton, Stafford, Fitzpatrick have all played way better than what we have seen for the Rams. Maybe you can say the Texans the last couple of weeks but over all I think you are WAY off base.

As in WAY off base.

 

[D L]

And yet our QB play hasn't been awful, the Lions sit at 11-4, the Eagles at 9-6, Texans 8-7 and the Bengals 10-5, all with worse QB play.

I'll give you that he is better than Lineman and Spags, but neither of them were retained, so simply being better than them isn't reason enough to retain Fisher.

I disagree whole-heartedly, give me Sanchez, Stafford, Dalton and Ryan Fitzpatrick over what we got.

 

[Prime Time]

I know they were together there but I'm not sure how much he mentored Snead. I'm not a fan of Dimitroff. If you're going to give up all those picks, you have to be able to find talent later in the draft. They haven't. That's why they aren't very good any more.

http://www.turfshowtimes.com/2013/5/13/4326434/les-snead-has-big-balls

Les Snead has 'big balls'
By Ryan Van Bibber  @justRVB on May 13 2013

USA TODAY Sports

The secret to the Rams GM's success isn't his hair.

Les Snead has "big balls." No really, Atlanta Falcons GM and his former boss and mentor Thomas Dimitroff told him so after Snead lead another furious trading frenzy through the opening night of the NFL Draft.

Peter King recounts the anecdote in his weekly travel journal and coffee diary:

One thing I didn't write that night. Well after the round ended: Snead's mentor, Atlanta GM Thomas Dimitroff, called Snead and said, "You've got big balls."

"I got 'em from you,'' Snead said.

Dimitroff's Falcons haven't been afraid to make big moves, in the draft or free agency. Snead's Rams have done the same over the last two years.
******************************************************
The more I think about it, the more I want Fisher and Snead in charge for the full five years.

Since the Chuck Noll era, which began in 1969, the Pittsburgh Steelers have had 3 head coaches while the Rams have had 13. The Steelers have their ups and downs but ownership sticks with their coaching staff. Both Noll and Bill Cowher retired. They weren't forced out as far as we know.

Chuck Noll's Steelers went 12-30 his first 3 seasons. It's a good thing they didn't dump him after his first 3 seasons because the Steelers became quite successful after that. Tom Landry and the Cowboys endured 6 losing seasons before they turned things around. There are other examples but you all get the point.

There's something to be said for stability, continuity, and having a vision for your team.

 

[Rams and Gators]

It isn't hard to justify really, all of those teams have had more stable, more consistent and more productive QB play. It isn't even close unless you want to make a case for Sanchez and how he's played. Otherwise Dalton, Stafford, Fitzpatrick have all played way better than what we have seen for the Rams. Maybe you can say the Texans the last couple of weeks but over all I think you are WAY off base.

As in WAY off base.

Fair enough I don't see any way I could argue with the overwhelming amount of evidence you've used, I'm now convinced...

 

[LesBaker]

Fair enough I don't see any way I could argue with the overwhelming amount of evidence you've used, I'm now convinced...

I have run circles around you. Here is a link.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/

 

[jrry32]

Well, since the Rams have no franchise QB to depend on, nothing to worry about!

Seriously though......we're freaking boned at the QB position now. 2014 was the year to seriously address it. And seriously....2015/2016, hell, maybe even 2017....those classes look frighteningly bad.

Way too early to declare 2016 as bad.

 

[Athos]

We'd be in the playoffs with Dalton, Stafford, and Fitzy.

Yea...our QB play is blah and those guys are at worst, average enough to see us to something greater.

 

[jrry32]

As for "not getting a QB this year when we should have", what ROOKIE QB would have been better prepared to do more than what we have gotten? Even if they would have pulled the trigger on Bortles, just because, do yo honestly think he would have been a better option THIS YEAR then what they have? If you say yes, then we will agree to disagree.

Teddy Bridgewater