Goff’s best throw of the night...

[Ram65]

If Woods hadn't stopped on the pick-six that might have been Goff's best throw of the night. He hung in there under great pressure and made the throw that looked to be on target.

 

[RamsOfCastamere]

I think he just needs to knock off the rust after being out a few weeks.

 

[Flint]

Hopefully he can get a couple of those deep shots, everything else seems to be working. Maybe Reynolds should be that guy, he doesn’t have Cook’s speed but the throw doesn’t have to be perfect to get it to him

 

[XXXIVwin]

You should spend... less time trolling my Rams

Hey Dieter, here’s what troll Maxie wrote on a different Rams board:

“Good WRs make that catch all day long. Even average WRs make it.

Cooks is not a WR1. He doesn’t make catches with people around him, forget about contested balls. He’s worthless in the red zone, and now he’s timid due to the scary concussions.

It’s a tough situation, but he’s got to go. Way overpaid.”

So.... a so-called “supporter” of the Rams describes Cooks as: below average...timid...worthless...overpaid....and got to go.

Maxie doesn’t write that trolling BS here at ROD because he knows the rules are a *little* stricter here.

Sorry guys but the fucking trolls are starting to take over this goddamn forum and I’m fucking sick of it. If you’re a fan of the Rams, then SUPPORT the team, don’t waste everyone’s time with all this BS trashing our players.

 

[max]

Hey Dieter, here’s what troll Maxie wrote on a different Rams board:

“Good WRs make that catch all day long. Even average WRs make it.

Cooks is not a WR1. He doesn’t make catches with people around him, forget about contested balls. He’s worthless in the red zone, and now he’s timid due to the scary concussions.

It’s a tough situation, but he’s got to go. Way overpaid.”

So.... a so-called “supporter” of the Rams describes Cooks as: below average...timid...worthless...overpaid....and got to go.

Maxie doesn’t write that trolling BS here at ROD because he knows the rules are a *little* stricter here.

Sorry guys but the fucking trolls are starting to take over this goddamn forum and I’m fucking sick of it. If you’re a fan of the Rams, then SUPPORT the team, don’t waste everyone’s time with all this BS trashing our players.

ive been a Rams fan since 1966. I’ve gone into deep depression when they’ve lost important games, starting with the loss to the Packers in 1967 when we had to play in GB when we were coastal division winners at 11-1-2 and they were 9-4-1. We lose a SB and I didn’t sleep for weeks. When we won the SB in 1999, I lost my voice.

I believe after 53 years of living and dying with my Rams I have earned the right to critically evaluate the team from top to bottom.

I don’t even know what trolling means, Ive been expressing my views long before it became a word. And I reserve my criticism of the Rams for those who support the team, not haters. I always defend my team against haters.

and I detest listening to pure rose colored homers who will tolerate mediocrity. I enjoy discussing what’s best for the Rams to improve with knowledgeable Rams fans. That’s why I’m here.

 

[Flint]

Hopefully he can get a couple of those deep shots, everything else seems to be working. Maybe Reynolds should be that guy, he doesn’t have Cook’s speed but the throw doesn’t have to be perfect

 

[GoodBadUgly]

Sorry guys but the fucking trolls are starting to take over this goddamn forum and I’m fucking sick of it. If you’re a fan of the Rams, then SUPPORT the team, don’t waste everyone’s time with all this BS trashing our players.

I just laugh when guys go overboard with their critique. We all want the Rams to win and this a way to vent some frustration when they don't. I get it.

I, like our coach, just want the team to focus on improving. Everything else will take care of itself. This is a lot more fun than when we checked in at 3-13 annually...

 

[-X-]

and I detest listening to pure rose colored homers who will tolerate mediocrity.

Then gfto. Because there are more than a few of "those people" here who understand that mediocrity among certain players is pretty much a given on every single team in the league, and they support those mediocre players regardless. I mean, why wouldn't you support players who aren't Aaron Donald or Todd Gurley level? That said, wtf does mediocre even mean? There's a standard in place that dictates you have to be a pretty exceptional player just to make it to this level, so being mediocre at this level is still 100X better than players who never even made it. And if they're wearing the blue & yella, then it doesn't make someone a homer to support that player or to offer some rationale behind why they're not among the top 5 at their position.

As it relates to Cooks, this is NOT a mediocre player.

And if his production has plummeted, or his head isn't in the game, or any other possible explanation to describe why he's not the same 1200 yd receiver he was just a year ago can be offered, then what's the problem? It makes someone a homer to describe him as something markedly different than what you're describing him as? He's still a talented receiver, he still commands the attention of the opposing team's #1 corner, and he's battling some pretty serious concussion issues along the way. If he's not the same guy he was a year ago, then that'll work itself out in due course. Dragging him through the gutter as that transpires is self-serving at best. Trolling at worst. And let's not pretend that you don't know what that means either. Everyone does.

Everyone.

 

[Kevin]

Sorry guys but the fucking trolls are starting to take over this goddamn forum and I’m fucking sick of it. If you’re a fan of the Rams, then SUPPORT the team, don’t waste everyone’s time with all this BS trashing our players.

I feel the same way though I don't know if it's trolling exactly, but I read so many posts where people present their opinions as facts and it creates an unfriendly back and forth with other people who disagree. I come to this forum to read and discuss all things Rams with an open mind, knowing that I don’t have the definitive answer to an unanswerable question. I do not come to this forum to read declarations about a player or coach that I am expected to agree with or be told I am a fool. It’s not a contest to be right about this or that.

 

[fearsomefour]

I see you working.

You should spend a little more time getting the wine and cheese stains out of your Jim Druckenmiller jersey and less time trolling my Rams

In miss the Druckenmiller Erickson Whiners.

 

[Ramit]

Then gfto. Because there are more than a few of "those people" here who understand that mediocrity among certain players is pretty much a given on every single team in the league, and they support those mediocre players regardless. I mean, why wouldn't you support players who aren't Aaron Donald or Todd Gurley level? That said, wtf does mediocre even mean? There's a standard in place that dictates you have to be a pretty exceptional player just to make it to this level, so being mediocre at this level is still 100X better than players who never even made it. And if they're wearing the blue & yella, then it doesn't make someone a homer to support that player or to offer some rationale behind why they're not among the top 5 at their position.

As it relates to Cooks, this is NOT a mediocre player.

View attachment 32613

And if his production has plummeted, or his head isn't in the game, or any other possible explanation to describe why he's not the same 1200 yd receiver he was just a year ago can be offered, then what's the problem? It makes someone a homer to describe him as something markedly different than what you're describing him as? He's still a talented receiver, he still commands the attention of the opposing team's #1 corner, and he's battling some pretty serious concussion issues along the way. If he's not the same guy he was a year ago, then that'll work itself out in due course. Dragging him through the gutter as that transpires is self-serving at best. Trolling at worst. And let's not pretend that you don't know what that means either. Everyone does.

Everyone.

I know that he puts up good numbers. My question to you would be this: does he do the same thing when we cant win without him producing? I mean, I can remember a SB not that long ago where we really needed him. I know you will probably attack me and group me into the same "troll" stereotype...I just am offering some food for thought. Cooks is payed "game on the line" money but isnt a "game on the line" player. However, i am not advocating to ge rid of him because he IS a needed piece in this offense. His speed stretches the field vertically...something mcvay needs to be successful. I just wish he could be payed more appropriately for the player that he is, not the player that the Rams hoped he could be.

 

[dieterbrock]

I know that he puts up good numbers. My question to you would be this: does he do the same thing when we cant win without him producing? I mean, I can remember a SB not that long ago where we really needed him. I know you will probably attack me and group me into the same "troll" stereotype...I just am offering some food for thought. Cooks is payed "game on the line" money but isnt a "game on the line" player. However, i am not advocating to ge rid of him because he IS a needed piece in this offense. His speed stretches the field vertically...something mcvay needs to be successful. I just wish he could be payed more appropriately for the player that he is, not the player that the Rams hoped he could be.

You mean the Superbowl where he caught 8 passes for 120 yards? Was easily the best offensive player on the team that day!
And the week before in New Orleans? His over the shoulder catch while being blanketed led to a last second 1st half TD that put the Rams back in the game. Without that catch, there likely is no SB...

 

[Ramit]

You mean the Superbowl where he caught 8 passes for 120 yards? Was easily the best offensive player on the team that day!
And the week before in New Orleans? His over the shoulder catch while being blanketed led to a last second 1st half TD that put the Rams back in the game. Without that catch, there likely is no SB...

Listen, I have no intention to engage in an argument, but you proved my point. Big numbers? Yes! Big time catches when we really really needed it? You could only provide me with 1 example.

 

[-X-]

I know that he puts up good numbers. My question to you would be this: does he do the same thing when we cant win without him producing? I mean, I can remember a SB not that long ago where we really needed him. I know you will probably attack me and group me into the same "troll" stereotype...I just am offering some food for thought. Cooks is payed "game on the line" money but isnt a "game on the line" player. However, i am not advocating to ge rid of him because he IS a needed piece in this offense. His speed stretches the field vertically...something mcvay needs to be successful. I just wish he could be payed more appropriately for the player that he is, not the player that the Rams hoped he could be.

I don't know the answer to that, because that's a scheme question. There are a lot of games during the year where a team's #1 wideout isn't involved in a game because he's either 1upped by an elite corner, or a team will roll coverage. Last year Cooks was the primary receiver where teams dedicated their #1 corner to him, but that didn't matter much because with Woods and Kupp, there were more options. Despite that, he still produced at a high level. In terms of his numbers, they are what they are. If you wanna get into advanced metrics like DVOA or DVAR, he's right there with Woods - 1 ranking above. But you're asking about, I think, clutch production.

There's not much to go on with that. New Orleans didn't sniff the playoffs when he was with them. When he was in N.E., he had 6 catches for 100 yards in the Conference Championship, and then was pretty much blanked in the SB because Amendola and White got all the targets. Cooks was targeted twice. In our Conference Championship game, Cooks was targeted 8 times and caught 7 for 107. In the SB, he was targeted 13 times, and caught 8 for 120. Woods was targeted 10 times and caught 5 of them. It's painful to say, but maybe N.E.'s, defense had something to do with that. The team as a whole produced 0 TDs.

We may have *needed him* to step up, but that's like asking a clutch hitter to hit a 3 run triple when down by 2 in the bottom of the 9th. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. But you can't really judge Cooks (in this case) on clutch production when he has only had 4 instances where he was in really important games. He produced in all but one, and that was because he wasn't targeted. So my question to you would be, is there room in his career and resume to have a subpar game (subjectively speaking) in a huge situation, or will one suffice before judgement is rendered? Because if the latter is the case, then we have a QB problem too.

 

[Ramit]

I don't know the answer to that, because that's a scheme question. There are a lot of games during the year where a team's #1 wideout isn't involved in a game because he's either 1upped by an elite corner, or a team will roll coverage. Last year Cooks was the primary receiver where teams dedicated their #1 corner to him, but that didn't matter much because with Woods and Kupp, there were more options. Despite that, he still produced at a high level. In terms of his numbers, they are what they are. If you wanna get into advanced metrics like DVOA or DVAR, he's right there with Woods - 1 ranking above. But you're asking about, I think, clutch production.

There's not much to go on with that. New Orleans didn't sniff the playoffs when he was with them. When he was in N.E., he had 6 catches for 100 yards in the Conference Championship, and then was pretty much blanked in the SB because Amendola and White got all the targets. Cooks was targeted twice. In our Conference Championship game, Cooks was targeted 8 times and caught 7 for 107. In the SB, he was targeted 13 times, and caught 8 for 120. Woods was targeted 10 times and caught 5 of them. It's painful to say, but maybe N.E.'s, defense had something to do with that. The team as a whole produced 0 TDs.

We may have *needed him* to step up, but that's like asking a clutch hitter to hit a 3 run triple when down by 2 in the bottom of the 9th. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. But you can't really judge Cooks (in this case) on clutch production when he has only had 4 instances where he was in really important games. He produced in all but one, and that was because he wasn't targeted. So my question to you would be, is there room in his career and resume to have a subpar game (subjectively speaking) in a huge situation, or will one suffice before judgement is rendered? Because if the latter is the case, then we have a QB problem too.

I appreciate your respectful and insightful response! Yes! There is room! But I think that comparing skill position players to QB's is like apple's and oranges. Goffs best years (hopefully) are ahead of him. Is the same true for BC?

 

[-X-]

I think that comparing skill position players to QB's is like apple's and oranges. Goffs best years (hopefully) are ahead of him. Is the same true for BC?

I have no idea if his best years are ahead of him. I kind of doubt it with his concussion history, and that's a shame in and of itself. Because he truly is a talented receiver. Any football novice could watch him over the years and know that he's been on another level. That aside, I don't know why comparing positions would be an apples-to-oranges comparison. We're talking about *players* who are *expected* to produce when counted on. That's what you said, right? Seems to me you're excusing Goff's role in a 3 point SB performance because he's young. But Goff just turned 25 and Cooks just turned 26. Not exactly a generation gap there.

But again, both should have the peak of their careers ahead of them. Difference being, again, Cooks has had trauma that is proven to shorten NFL careers. Goff, not so much - at least not yet. Anyway, Cooks - in my opinion - is someone who can only benefit this team when healthy. I - personally - don't see much in his history that would give me pause to rely on him in big situations. He's the type of receiver who relies on speed and elusiveness to produce big. He's not a Randy Moss or Megatron where you can just throw a ball in his general vicinity and get favorable results a majority of the time. So if we're *expecting* him to be that, we'll be disappointed. I'm not expecting that. Clutch receptions? Sure. Win contested balls? I mean, yeah, but I'm not relying on his weakness to be a strength. Burn defenses over the top or get copious amounts of separation on crossing routes? Hell yeah. That much I do expect.

 

[RamsInfiniti]

My gut is that Cooks will impact one of these remaining three games and everybody will be talking about how he's back and he's a premier WR, etc. Memories are short on the football field.

Many still think Troy Hill is mediocre, despite putting up some of the best numbers by a CB in the entire league. But if he gets beat one time, everybody is calling him out.

 

[Merlin]

What I dislike about boards in general is the way fans turn so quickly on players, discounting the human effect and that most of them are going to go up/down and whatnot. We are seeing that right now with not only Cooks but Havenstein as well. It's what we do.

Cooks as the example here the best situation is he gets back to who he was last season. It might not happen until next year either. None of us know wtf his deal is, or how much it relates to the concussion side. But I do know that route he ran that was picked is not something he would have done in 2018. In 2018 that would have been a completion for a TD or damn near. That sideline pass too I mean damn.

But lastly... Let's not act like the Rams didn't know who Cooks was. If he was a guy with zero faults they wouldn't have been able to get him, and he wouldn't have been moved twice in his young career. Rams were aware he's a field stretcher who can blow by most corners but who has always been weak with contested catches and prone to a strong press game at the line.

So as annoyed as I am by his play of late and in spite of the fact I think they should bench him, I do actually hope he comes around. It's the best possible option for the Rams.

 

[Ramit]

I have no idea if his best years are ahead of him. I kind of doubt it with his concussion history, and that's a shame in and of itself. Because he truly is a talented receiver. Any football novice could watch him over the years and know that he's been on another level. That aside, I don't know why comparing positions would be an apples-to-oranges comparison. We're talking about *players* who are *expected* to produce when counted on. That's what you said, right? Seems to me you're excusing Goff's role in a 3 point SB performance because he's young. But Goff just turned 25 and Cooks just turned 26. Not exactly a generation gap there.

But again, both should have the peak of their careers ahead of them. Difference being, again, Cooks has had trauma that is proven to shorten NFL careers. Goff, not so much - at least not yet. Anyway, Cooks - in my opinion - is someone who can only benefit this team when healthy. I - personally - don't see much in his history that would give me pause to rely on him in big situations. He's the type of receiver who relies on speed and elusiveness to produce big. He's not a Randy Moss or Megatron where you can just throw a ball in his general vicinity and get favorable results a majority of the time. So if we're *expecting* him to be that, we'll be disappointed. I'm not expecting that. Clutch receptions? Sure. Win contested balls? I mean, yeah, but I'm not relying on his weakness to be a strength. Burn defenses over the top or get copious amounts of separation on crossing routes? Hell yeah. That much I do expect.

Let me be more clear in what I mean with the whole position comparison. QBs are expected to "emerge" in what? Their 5th year? It generally takes them that long to show whatever it is that they have to show because the position demands so much of them mentally. A WR? Of course they need to know the offense and all that, but their position is more one that demands physical skills above mental ones. I mean, yes, the true greats have both but you dont have to be a wonderlic genius to be a pro bowl receiver. So no, I am not excusing Goff but I think we can very easily get sucked back down that rabbit hole again. I blamed McVay for the SB above and beyond any blame anyone can shoulder. Brandin has had many concussions and while I know that his physical prime (and what should be his best years) is ahead of him, I'm not sure. He does seem to have regressed some due to mental errors so I worry that he may become more of a Brian Quick than Brandon Cooks. Because while you dont need to be a genius, you do still have to execute fundamentals such as leverage. I sincerely hope that he returns to form. I'm just not sold on him anymore. I'll root for him until he isnt a ram anymore. But I cant promise that I can refrain from voicing disappointment in him when he has games like sunday night.

 

[-X-]

Let me be more clear in what I mean with the whole position comparison. QBs are expected to "emerge" in what? Their 5th year? It generally takes them that long to show whatever it is that they have to show because the position demands so much of them mentally. A WR? Of course they need to know the offense and all that, but their position is more one that demands physical skills above mental ones. I mean, yes, the true greats have both but you dont have to be a wonderlic genius to be a pro bowl receiver. So no, I am not excusing Goff but I think we can very easily get sucked back down that rabbit hole again. I blamed McVay for the SB above and beyond any blame anyone can shoulder. Brandin has had many concussions and while I know that his physical prime (and what should be his best years) is ahead of him, I'm not sure. He does seem to have regressed some due to mental errors so I worry that he may become more of a Brian Quick than Brandon Cooks. Because while you dont need to be a genius, you do still have to execute fundamentals such as leverage. I sincerely hope that he returns to form. I'm just not sold on him anymore. I'll root for him until he isnt a ram anymore. But I cant promise that I can refrain from voicing disappointment in him when he has games like sunday night.

Fair enough.

And nobody's expecting you to refrain from voicing disappointment over a player having a bad game. You'd have to be a robot or the recent recipient of a frontal phlebotomy to not express disappointment over a player not making plays that they absolutely should make. Yeah, that's not a problem. BELABORING disappointment and turning it into a crusade in an attempt to "convince" everyone else that said player is garbage and they're stupid for not realizing your truth?

That's not what we do here.
(not saying you do that - just clarifying the standard)