Fisher sounds as if Rams will pass on Watkins/PD

[iced]

I am not taking anything away from Stacy. Love the guy. However, the flourishing running game, IMO, was a mixture of playcalling, line shuffling (Saffold moved to RG) and Stacy. DRich was injured early and it showed. It didn't help that Schotty kept running him into the teeth of the defense.....in bad situations. DRich is a quality RB IMO, when use appropriately. He simply was NOT used correctly last year, and was injured as a result. Regardless, DRich is not a "70%" tailback in this league at all. He is at his best when used as a change of pace back. Primarily running outside on sweeps, pitches, etc, where he can utilize his speed and burst at the edge. I would guess that the coaches biggest concern with him is his pass blocking, which is critical.

I disagree completely. The problem was not the offensive line blocking; every other back pretty much out produced Drich. The problem is his vision; i can't tell you how many times i'd see a whole developing and he'd either miss the read or didn't set up his blocking correctly. There's a reason he lost out to Pead in mid to late season. People say it was injury but he came off the injury report and was still inactive for at least the next 2 weeks.

Even as a change of pace back Drich still was unproductive.

 

[Angry Ram]

I don't believe anything being said right now.

He basically did the same thing for all the guys. Praised them and acknowledged they all could help the team. Doesn't put a concrete on anything.

 

[RFIP]

Sam Bradford with Zac Stacy as a starter in 2013 = 0. And if you think these stats will be REMOTELY that vs those 3 teams ESPECIALLY on the road you are mistaken.

If Quick still sucks and Givens doesn't rebound it's going to be as ugly in those 3 venues this year as it was last.

No, it won't be. If the Rams win and the guy we picked instead of Watkins is great, nobody will care.

As far as the second sentence, I don't agree with you.

Sam Bradford with Zac Stacy as a starter in 2013
52/80
65%
594 yards
7.4 YPA
7 TDs
1 Int
111.1 QB Rating

And he did that with rookie Tavon, no Stedman, 2013 Quick and Givens, Cook, Kendricks and Pettis.

So it seems to me that Quick emerging and Givens rebounding is far from a necessity. If they do? Amazing. But if they don't, we certainly aren't dead in the water. Especially if Tavon and Stedman progress as expected.

 

[classicpony]

Don't let that flying turd hit you in the head. Believe nothing till after the draft.

 

[RamFan503]

Martz is the only Rams HC with a winning record(53-32) since John Robinson, and that dates back to the 1983-1991 seasons. He has the highest winning percentage(.623) since Chuck Knox who coached during the 70's. Link There was a time however when I was actually glad he was moving on but in retrospect, after a series of several failed coaches, I can see why some would love to have him back as HC. He was a winner.

Except that look what he inherited and think about how fast that unit was destroyed. He wasn't a good talent evaluator. He was a terrible clock manager. He got his QBs killed. He allowed the likes of London Fletcher to pretty much walk. I just was not a fan of how mad Mike ran a team. He ran a very potent offense with all those weapons but he was pretty well exposed everywhere else he went.

 

[BatteringRambo]

Fisher sounds "as-if" as of March. Cough cough. Cough cough. Another bong rip please

 

[Prime Time]

Except that look what he inherited and think about how fast that unit was destroyed. He wasn't a good talent evaluator. He was a terrible clock manager. He got his QBs killed. He allowed the likes of London Fletcher to pretty much walk. I just was not a fan of how mad Mike ran a team. He ran a very potent offense with all those weapons but he was pretty well exposed everywhere else he went.

Oh I totally agree with every point you made. We all know this - not every coordinator is able to handle a head coaching position. Spags, Linehan, Norv Turner, etc. The examples are legion. I remember yelling at the TV for Martz to run the damn ball during our Super Bowl loss to the Pats, not to mention pulling out my hair at some of his bonehead moves. And let's not even get into his broadcast career thus far. Mike Martz will always be a polarizing figure - love him or hate him.

Still it's amazing what Martz was able to accomplish with Shaw and Zygmunt lurking in the background. At the end of the day he was a coach with a winning record and no one can take that away from him. If he ever writes a book about his NFL experiences I'm buying it.

 

[rdlkgliders]

We’re still seeing improvement from (receivers), for example, Brian Quick, Chris Givens who are going into their third year.

 

[jrry32]

Sam Bradford with Zac Stacy as a starter in 2013 = 0. And if you think these stats will be REMOTELY that vs those 3 teams ESPECIALLY on the road you are mistaken.

If Quick still sucks and Givens doesn't rebound it's going to be as ugly in those 3 venues this year as it was last.

What? I'm not even sure we're speaking the same language because I have no earthly idea what you're talking about here. 0 what? What stats will be remotely that vs. what teams?

 

[Mojo Ram]

I am not taking anything away from Stacy. Love the guy. However, the flourishing running game, IMO, was a mixture of playcalling, line shuffling (Saffold moved to RG) and Stacy. DRich was injured early and it showed. It didn't help that Schotty kept running him into the teeth of the defense.....in bad situations. DRich is a quality RB IMO, when use appropriately. He simply was NOT used correctly last year, and was injured as a result. Regardless, DRich is not a "70%" tailback in this league at all. He is at his best when used as a change of pace back. Primarily running outside on sweeps, pitches, etc, where he can utilize his speed and burst at the edge. I would guess that the coaches biggest concern with him is his pass blocking, which is critical.

+1

 

[RFIP]

What? I'm not even sure we're speaking the same language because I have no earthly idea what you're talking about here. 0 what? What stats will be remotely that vs. what teams?

You posted Sam's stats "with Stacy at B" and I am telling you those stats were not complied in games play at SF, Seattle and Arizona. And I'll go a step further, they were not compiled once good teams got a handle on the Rams new run game.

There is NOTHING at receiver right now that will scare teams out of these 8 and nine man fronts, which will lead to the same results this season. Especially when you see Schotty's penchant for taking Tavon off the field on run downs in favor or (not so) Quick.

 

[RamFan503]

You posted Sam's stats "with Stacy at B" and I am telling you those stats were not complied in games play at SF, Seattle and Arizona. And I'll go a step further, they were not compiled once good teams got a handle on the Rams new run game.

There is NOTHING at receiver right now that will scare teams out of these 8 and nine man fronts, which will lead to the same results this season. Especially when you see Schotty's penchant for taking Tavon off the field on run downs in favor or (not so) Quick.

I think you're getting way off the deep end on the WR need. A decent running game and a line that can actually give the QB some time and we have seen plenty of instances where just decent receivers become big aspects of the game.

If as you say, Fish doesn't understand how to build an offense, then I suppose it's a moot point - right? What good would another receiver be? Especially one who is not even truly in that #1 mold.

The thought that we go into this year as a static offense to last year if we don't go with Watkins, IMO is just ignoring our other personnel and the other hole you would be filling because you have a woody for a particular player or position. The strength of our division is very much geared toward taking the passing game away. And while I would agree that our one dimensional offense was exposed in many games after Stacy started taking the majority of snaps, we also had a QB that was no threat deep and almost no threat in the mid range game. We had an O-line that was woefully inadequate at pass blocking and had to keep extra players in to block. It was a no brainer to load the box.

You may not like the weapons we have at receiver. But many of us don't buy that adding a receiver like Watkins to that mix really helps all that much. Maybe he would but IMO not if our QB is having to get rid of the ball in 2 seconds.

Nothing that will scare teams out of 8 and 9 man fronts? How about a QB that can actually hit a receiver downfield (or for that matter - look left)? How about a play action that actually has some credibility because you can open some holes AND give the QB a pocket? How about a receiver in Sted that started to come on in his rookie year after posting insanely better numbers in college than any other receiver in this draft?

Simple fact is that Quick WAS open down the left side on several plays. We were not able to take advantage of that. Insert Watkins and we still wouldn't have been able to take advantage of that with Clemens' inability to make that throw - especially while being chased from the pocket.

 

[jrry32]

You posted Sam's stats "with Stacy at B" and I am telling you those stats were not complied in games play at SF, Seattle and Arizona. And I'll go a step further, they were not compiled once good teams got a handle on the Rams new run game.

There is NOTHING at receiver right now that will scare teams out of these 8 and nine man fronts, which will lead to the same results this season. Especially when you see Schotty's penchant for taking Tavon off the field on run downs in favor or (not so) Quick.

Nope but one of those games did come against the NFL's #2 defense in the Carolina Panthers...and Sam looked quite great.

So I'm going to stick with my stance that Sammy Watkins does not make or break this team. He's a luxury...but it's nice we could consider a luxury as a top pick...been awhile since that was possible.

Sam Bradford in 2012 against Arizona, Seattle, and San Francisco
6 Games
108/188
57.4%
1315 yards
7.0 YPA
7 TDs
4 Ints
82.6 QB Rating
Rams record: 4-1-1

Hmmm...what WRs did Bradford have in 2012? Because he seemed to do well against those defenses. Do you think Sam Bradford isn't a good enough QB? I can't think of another reason other than Bradford not being good enough for the success of our passing game to rely entirely on a rookie WR.

 

[RFIP]

The 2012 Bardford stats are very fair and relevant imo. That said, it's about evolution and the type offense we ran then to the one we used in 2013 is different as are the receivers. They completely shut down Stacy in the 3 road west games and as of today I see no way that changes.

As for Watkins being a luxury I laugh at that notion. If he and Austin are on the field at the same time you have instantly ended all thoughts of 8 in the box.

No sane DC plays single high against the Rams if Tavon and Watkins are split to either side.

That isn't a luxury my friend, that is a necessity, and a fact.

Nope but one of those games did come against the NFL's #2 defense in the Carolina Panthers...and Sam looked quite great.

So I'm going to stick with my stance that Sammy Watkins does not make or break this team. He's a luxury...but it's nice we could consider a luxury as a top pick...been awhile since that was possible.

Sam Bradford in 2012 against Arizona, Seattle, and San Francisco
6 Games
108/188
57.4%
1315 yards
7.0 YPA
7 TDs
4 Ints
82.6 QB Rating
Rams record: 4-1-1

Hmmm...what WRs did Bradford have in 2012? Because he seemed to do well against those defenses. Do you think Sam Bradford isn't a good enough QB? I can't think of another reason other than Bradford not being good enough for the success of our passing game to rely entirely on a rookie WR.

 

[jrry32]

The 2012 Bardford stats are very fair and relevant imo. That said, it's about evolution and the type offense we ran then to the one we used in 2013 is different as are the receivers. They completely shut down Stacy in the 3 road west games and as of today I see no way that changes.

As for Watkins being a luxury I laugh at that notion. If he and Austin are on the field at the same time you have instantly ended all thoughts of 8 in the box.

No sane DC plays single high against the Rams if Tavon and Watkins are split to either side.

That isn't a luxury my friend, that is a necessity, and a fact.

He's a rookie WR. You could say the same thing if Chris Givens and Tavon are on the field at the same time.

Watkins is a luxury. And no, it isn't a fact. It's an opinion.

As far as Stacy goes, it's easy to shutdown Stacy with a strong defense when Kellen Clemens is leading the passing attack.

 

[RFIP]

He's a rookie WR. You could say the same thing if Chris Givens and Tavon are on the field at the same time.

Watkins is a luxury. And no, it isn't a fact. It's an opinion.

As far as Stacy goes, it's easy to shutdown Stacy with a strong defense when Kellen Clemens is leading the passing attack.

LOL, you are as hard headed as my wife!!

Watkins being a luxury on a team with 5 wr's and who are by name; Givens, Austin, Quick, Bailey and Pettis is laughable.

And I'll leave it at that.

 

[Memphis Ram]

The 2012 Bardford stats are very fair and relevant imo. That said, it's about evolution and the type offense we ran then to the one we used in 2013 is different as are the receivers. They completely shut down Stacy in the 3 road west games and as of today I see no way that changes.

As for Watkins being a luxury I laugh at that notion. If he and Austin are on the field at the same time you have instantly ended all thoughts of 8 in the box.

No sane DC plays single high against the Rams if Tavon and Watkins are split to either side.

That isn't a luxury my friend, that is a necessity, and a fact.

They do if they don't believe the QB can get them the ball. If Clemens accuracy struggles on deeper routes are well known by the fans, why wouldn't DCs not know it, too?

BTW, but I don't buy a WR having that much of an impact on a team's rushing attack when teams like the Packers, Lions, Cardinals have had talent at the position yet had gone through several years struggling to run the football when they needed.

 

[jrry32]

LOL, you are as hard headed as my wife!!

Watkins being a luxury on a team with 5 wr's and who are by name; Givens, Austin, Quick, Bailey and Pettis is laughable.

And I'll leave it at that.

It's a luxury. The humor in all of this is the assumption that Watkins will walk in as a rookie and immediately be a #1 WR. Not even Calvin Johnson did that. It's a short list of WRs that were capable of it. And Watkins? He's not an extremely polished WR.

 

[laramsoriginal]

Lol. Someone has a man crush...

 

[RamFan503]

As for Watkins being a luxury I laugh at that notion. If he and Austin are on the field at the same time you have instantly ended all thoughts of 8 in the box.

No sane DC plays single high against the Rams if Tavon and Watkins are split to either side.

That isn't a luxury my friend, that is a necessity, and a fact.

That is your opinion. But there is no way you can fully project that Watkins is that kind of pro just based on what he did against college teams. If you really want to go that way then he is no better than what we already have. He may be that great #1 in the making but Fitz never made the SB without Warner and CJ is still looking for a playoff experience. And honestly? Do you really look at Watkins on anywhere NEAR that level? Name one #1 receiver that put a team over the top towards winning it all. You going to put this kid in the Jerry Rice or Isaac Bruce level? I'm not. Especially in year one - let alone that those players didn't exactly light the world on fire their first year. Is he a CJ or a Green or a Jones - or so many others? I seriously doubt it. So - almost by definition with this team - he IS a luxury. He's not that OBVIOUS #1 receiver. He's not that guy you look at as a can't miss or even a sure thing. He's a 6'1" receiver with a very good college career for two years.