Reread my post and remember how sarcastic I am.
Then only read the capital letters.
Davante Adams looks slow, no separation.
- Thread starter BobbyOrr4
- Start date
-
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.
Then only read the capital letters.
And I could be wrong but I think every post is negative and trolling in nature.
He's on place for 1200 yards and 13 touchdowns lol what are we doing, guys?
I highly doubt he didn't know Puka was WR1 when he signed here. Besides, he's getting about 100 targets per game. Just two weeks ago people were saying Stafford was force feeding him.
He should be on pace for 1900 yards and 20 touchdowns. What a slacker.
I thought there was a chance you were being sarcastic but was not sure.Reread my post and remember how sarcastic I am.
Then only read the capital letters.
There was a lack of Blue Font ... Plus ... Unless someone checked the OP's bio, they wouldn't know how short a time he had been on ROD, or how few posts he had in that time.
Now ... as far as Remembering 'how sarcastic' you are ... That just ain't going to happen.
All over to Puka. You can't even spell his name right, and you claim to be an expert?
As so many people here have politely told you in ways that include statistics and the correlation to Stafford and Davante, you're wrong. I'm just here to tell you this: you're absolutely dead wrong.
I'm assuming, like Soul Surfer said, you're a sock puppet troll account for someone on this forum. The rules specifically forbid sock puppets. The rules specifically forbid trolling. Thirty posts with nothing but trolling? I don't think you're very long for this forum.
CoachAllred
Hall of Fame
Adams is getting good share of targets against 9ers Adams had 11 targets Puca had 12
In the 4 games prior Puka had 37.6% - Adams had 26%.
IT's the catches per target
In the first 4 games Puca had 50 tgts with 43 catchable and 1 drop RZ targets2
In the first 4 games Adams had 35 tgts with 19 catchable and 2 drops. But he also got 9 RZ targets
Not sure if puka is running more short to intermediate and Adams Is running the deeper routes.
Regardless the difference. The catchable ball % is far below what it should be.
It's still early. Let;s hope Coach , QB and WR can fix this huge gap in catchable balls
thrown Adams way.
Just My 2 cents. which is definitely short of a nickel.
methomas50
Starter
Adams has 22 receptions for 357 yards and 3 touchdowns and a 16.2 yards per reception to date.
Kupp has 15 receptions for. 162 yards and 0 touchdowns and a 10.8 yards per reception to date
Not really close at this point.
Here's why it's not Kupp 2.0.
Per the announcers in the Colts opposing teams are putting their top CB on Adams. Kupp had stopped drawing the top DB a while ago.
Teams know when a guy is done and it's reflected in how they play him.
That's fine. His statement holds no water tho. Heres a fun fact
+17.7% Route Win Rate (11th-best) for Adams in a 2025. I'll take 11th best win rate in the NFL after 5 games
Last edited:
No wonder he’s slowing down. The dude must be exhausted!
Don't forget Devonte has been nursing a hamstring injury for quite a few games now.
Maybe you shouldn't be negative over every single one of your thirty-one posts without fail (really, it's not hard to look up thirty - now thirty-one, I suppose - posts on this site, especially by a single poster), and we won't call you out. It's really that simple.
Speaking as a fellow St. Louisan who has never stopped being a fan of the Rams, Blues, Cardinals, and Tigers, and has tried her best to be positive for her teams and look at the good, not entirely the bad. I'm not saying this site is supposed to be supposed "Pollyannas", but we are homers about this team, and we're unapologetic about that.
Brag about your size, sexual attraction, what sports you played, and all that other unrelated (and rulebreaking, for that matter) stuff all you'd like; it doesn't change what this site's about, and it only makes you look worse.