Fisher on how the Rams offense will adjust without Sam Bradford
- Thread starter -X-
- 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.
mr.stlouis
Legend
Agreed, the rest of the season should be the Zac Stacy show. Even if we lose every game we should be pounding that rock and getting STacy every look and carry he can get. Maybe get Barret Jones some work in the latter half of the season. And work those young WRs through as many patterns as possible whether they get thrown a ball that is catchable or not. We still have a chance for an awful lot of young people to get reps and get better for next season.
I will be disappointed if/when we become eliminated from the playoffs if this does not happen.
Exactly what I meant!You mean after the conference championship game?eek::woot::bigup:
I see no reason to think this will be a team that is one dimensional. Clemens knows the offense, has shown a strong arm and with some reps could be good enough to manage this offense. If the defense steps up, special teams plays well and they quite making the dumb mistakes there is no reason to believe they will lose only because Clemens is playing.
This team probably figures it has nothing to lose at this point. THAT is the kinda team that can sneak up on people and grudge F$%& them (oh, hi seasquawks!!) without grease. I would love to see this squad continue to gel and play good, smart football in honor of their fallen QB. Stacy has already changed the identity of this team and there is no reason or excuse to expect them to fall apart now. When we defend Sam, we say it is a TEAM that succeeds or fails. Not a single player. The same is true now. Fucking GO Kellen/Austin/Brady.....fucking GO RAMS.
Kellen Clemens does not have a strong arm. And he's never been a capable game manager in his career.
We will fight our way through this. Teams will respect our tenacity. We are not the first team to lose their Qb.
we fight, we fight, we fight!
What do you think about our front office's decision to keep 1 backup QB, and for that QB to be KC? Was this a reasonable decision, or an irresponsible gamble, or somewhere in between?
I know this question was not directed at me but I'll take a stab at it anyway. I think it was a reasonable gamble that, in fact, paid off. What were our options? If we had kept 3 QBs the 3rd was likely to be A. Davis, who was beat out by KC.
In order to keep 3 we'd have had to let someone else the coaching staff was higher on go. We now have been able to keep that 53rd player, whomever he is, and bring A. Davis back in. I have to say the gamble worked as well as it could.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #18
Keeping 3 QBs is a luxury. We're down to our 2nd and had to go shopping for a backup. When you get down to having to use your THIRD quarterback, then you're up a creek anyway. In other words, it doesn't really matter who it is. You're screwed.