Howid Ballzuh

  • 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.

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
RealRamsFan said:
bluecoconuts said:
The Rams haven't been afforded the luxury of developing players like Green Bay has.

The Packers also had a much stronger roster in 2008 following. In 2007 they went to the NFC Championship game, and lost in OT to the Giants. In 2008 they transitioned to Rodgers on offense, and started to revamp their defense a bit. Suffered a setback but was able to come back the next year.


You can't really compare the two, because the Rams have been pretty lackluster since the Greatest Show on Turf days. That's a long time of shitty drafting, and FO decisions, and it doesn't fix easily. 2009 was basically a wash for Spags, he tried to get some older guys who understood his defense (former Giants, etc) to help teach it to the players, and tried to rebuild the team on both sides of the ball. We can see the defense making improvements (although the run game needs to fix itself) and the offense shows flashes. We still need talent and most of all stability on both sides of the ball though. Which is why I want Spagnuolo here for another year.


Why can't I compare the two?

They did it the right way and every successful time I pick draft and developed their players. They then signed FA to feel additional voids!

And Rams don't hav Luxury to develop their players? As ridiculous as that sound you're right ....reason? Because they do not have the staff to do It.

Even X said this regime subpar in drafting and developing. What make you believe they will learn in year four?

Guess it's the same as Gibson learning how to he a starting WR since he is entering year three ....how'd that work out?

Spags will not be here in 2012. Let's just root the Rams on to make a better selection


You can't compare the two because since 2009 the Rams have had to start over, the Packers already had a very good foundation as a team that had been to the NFC Championship game, and was very close from a Super Bowl appearance just two years prior. Trying to compare their down year to ours and saying they were able to turn it around in a year isn't correct, because they already had a solid roster beforehand. The Rams did not get that.

The Rams also haven't had a chance to develop young players because of all the injuries. They are forced to either play young players too soon, which can destroy player development, or release them and pick up older guys who can at least plug in and have some experience, not needing to adapt to the game, the learning curve isn't as steep.


I'm not saying the Rams haven't made some mistakes in drafting and developing, but I am giving reasons for why things aren't magically better in year three. The Rams are still lacking in talent, it's not easy to rebuild a team, you can't do it in 3 years when you're basically starting from scratch. Having to learn a new offense, and all the injuries have really setback the offense, but that does not mean we should just blow up the roster and start again. If we do that we will be in this hole even longer. Spags and Billy D. will finally have a regular offseason (the first one) next offseason, and I expect them to be a lot different next year. If they are unable to show improvement, then I will support a regime change.

Until then I do not. Changing systems on the team will only hurt them at this point, it takes time to do these things, and as frustrating as it is for the fanbase, you have to be smart about it.
 

Anonymous

Guest
bluecoconuts said:
The Rams haven't been afforded the luxury of developing players like Green Bay has.

The Packers also had a much stronger roster in 2008 following. In 2007 they went to the NFC Championship game, and lost in OT to the Giants. In 2008 they transitioned to Rodgers on offense, and started to revamp their defense a bit. Suffered a setback but was able to come back the next year.


You can't really compare the two, because the Rams have been pretty lackluster since the Greatest Show on Turf days. That's a long time of shitty drafting, and FO decisions, and it doesn't fix easily. 2009 was basically a wash for Spags, he tried to get some older guys who understood his defense (former Giants, etc) to help teach it to the players, and tried to rebuild the team on both sides of the ball. We can see the defense making improvements (although the run game needs to fix itself) and the offense shows flashes. We still need talent and most of all stability on both sides of the ball though. Which is why I want Spagnuolo here for another year.

I agree with your approach. Thompson took over in 2005 and he hired McCarthy in 2006. When they took over they inherited several key players. They added to those--for several consecutive drafts. That means that when the 2010 Packers went to the superbowl they had been drafting that team for 6 years.

In contrast, Spags inherited next to nothing in 2009. The situations are not remotely the same.

In 3 more years, compare the 2014 Rams to the 2010 Packers.
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #23
RealRamsFan said:
X said:
RealRamsFan said:
Their 3rd round pick in 2010 ( Morgan Burnett) is better than our 3rd round pick in that year.....Murphy
And there it is. The Super Bowl winning Green Bay Packers vs the rebuilding St Louis Rams comparison.

TKO.

I have nothing else to offer. Everything should be exactly the same as a team that is the poster child for continuity and stability. I mean, hell, if Green Bay can do it, why can't the Rams? They both had the same amount of depth. Both drafted REALLY well going back to 2000, and both have solid starters with room to groom younger developmental players. Yes, they're exactly the same. I surrender to your better knowledge once and for all.

Oh, and not for nothing, but Morgan Burnett didn't get injured the year after he was drafted and subsequently placed on IR during the off-season. He also was called upon to step into a starter's role right after he was drafted. He played FOUR fucking games to Murphy's FOURTEEN. So for that, you're absolutely right. Burnett IS better.

Or is he?

Burnett - 2010:
12 solo tackles, 1 interception, 1 pass defensed.

Murphy - 2010:
25 solo tackles, 1 interception, 3 passes defensed.

Guy. Just stop. This team is what it is for a number of reasons. Spagnuolo may be a part of the problem, but you need to be a calculus major to figure out how he alone factors into the big picture. This is Vermeil 1998 all over again, and it's equally as tiring. I truly do give up on trying to reason with you anymore.

... the Packers. :roll:

They weren't the Super Bowl Packers at that time ....or 2009 When they picked 9th overall.

I used the "Super Bowl" Packers because they showed the blue print ......

Before they were the "Super Bowl " Packers they were the 6-10 Green Bay Packers.

They used their draft picks and obtained Raji and Matthews. They used FA money and signed Woodson . They Didn't cut Jermichael Finley, who only had 74 yards his rookie season. They didn't release Jones who was lackluster in 2008.....they developed them .....
They didn't trade AJ Hawk for a WR who was marginal at best because he didn't fit on the right side anymore ..

They developed him further and moved him to the left side ....

You see how they took a 6-10 team and turned them into Champions? Development, great drafting, FA pick ups, and so on .

Now am I saying Spags should have us in Super Bowl? No!

But in 3 years .....we should not be discussing "still building "

Piss or get your ass off the pot ...

That's what I was told while jacking off....

And that's exactly what we're doing ....fucking ourselves
LOL Come on man! You're still going with the Packers on this? The same Packers that had 2 (TWO) losing seasons in the last TWENTY YEARS? Those Packers? You're hanging on this 6-10 season like it was the year they blew up their roster and were in need of 17 starters. They were in the Conference Championship the year before that. I can't express enough how ridiculous these comparisons are. They took a 6-10 team and made them Champions? Really? REALLY? Through drafting and free agency? That's how they did that? There is no emoticon for that. They've been drafting well for a decade.

Trade Hawk for a wide receiver? What does that mean? If you're talking about trading Witherspoon for Gibson, there was a very good reason why they did that. They were running out of wide receivers. Literally. Does that kind of "no depth" account for anything with you? I mean, ANYTHING? Vance, you simply can't compare the two teams in any manner and expect it to be a rational discussion. You just can't.

I know I said I was done -- but man....... this just keeps getting more bizarre.
 

Selassie I

H. I. M.
Moderator
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
18,300
Name
Haole
X said:
Selassie I said:
Man I have to take exception with some of what you're saying here X...

1) Spags and Devaney deserve criticism for their job performance. Saying that it's "undue" ,,, C'mon.

2) I question Spags' ability to coach players based on the regression I see with a number of players who are supposed to be cornerstones for our team. The replacement secondary is the one area of this team that I would like to think that Spags has made a positive coaching impression. That's not enough for me.

3) You seem to believe that Spags is also able to keep a team focused on a goal. With the continuing pattern of stupid penalties, inability to stop the run, and giving up big plays ALONE - I find this almost impossible for me to believe. This pattern has been constant since Spags has been HC, and there's no improvement really. What GOAL does he have them focused on that you can see? If you're going to say the team is playing Hard,,, I would just like to say that many of these "hard playing" players are playing for their football lives (their jobs). I would submit that these players are playing hard for the almighty $ more than they are for Spags.


I wish I honestly had a feeling of confidence in Spags that many of you are apparently able to have. It's long gone for me. I guess if I did, I would also (tambien) be torn right now given the state of the team. Nobody feels good right now. This shit fucking sucks.


I've also been getting the feeling that Fans who are ready to move on from the current regime are considered part of the Mob, knee-jerk, Madden football IQed, or just plain Leper like around here lately. Maybe I might feel better if I start throwing a few barbs too, maybe I could relieve some of this tension I've got built up inside?
Fair enough.

Here's why I say it's undue. Because it's misplaced. Your second point reaffirms that. Players don't regress unless something drastically changes. The regression we're seeing on the offensive side of the ball is due to a new offensive coordinator. We saw improvement in 2010, and now we're seeing regression. To put that all on Spagnuolo is undue criticism as far as I'm concerned. He hired him though, so I guess that's justification for calling for his head? But..... are we sure it was HE who hired McDaniels? They interviewed several WCO offensive coordinators as well. Which would seem like the more likely fit for someone like Spagnuolo?

As far as keeping the team goal-oriented, no - I wasn't going to say "playing hard." The goal is always the next game. No matter how good you are, or how bad you are. I know we've all seen teams just flat out quit after losing several straight, but that doesn't happen here. They come prepared for the next challenge. That may be a small consolation, but I see it as much more than that. Are rookies, Steven Jackson, Bradford and a banged up secondary, banged up O-line, and banged up receivers enough to win? Of course not. It would be nice if they could go ahead and win in spite of all that, but that's unrealistic. So the fact that the team KNOWS they're behind the 8-ball every game and STILL comes to play, speaks a lot to me. If that's not enough, then it's not enough. It just means a lot to *me*.

Finally, if you feel like you're being attacked by differing opinions, then I apologize for that. It was, I thought, a consensus that this board would provide refuge from the mass hysteria that plagues other boards. And by hysteria, I mean multiple threads with the words, "Fire", "Cut", "Sucks", "Loser", etc in every title. Maybe I'm trying to hard to keep that shit out of our house here. If it makes you feel convicted inside when I go to war over shitty arguments, then I suppose I could just dial it back a little.

But you know me. You know my post history. You know my passion. Did you expect me to lay down?

Not if you know me.

I don't have a problem with people who say things like, "You know, I think this whole thing needs to be rebooted. Get rid of the HC, GM, all the assistants, and let's see what happens with some new blood." That actually doesn't bother me. It's just someone saying they want to try something radically different. But to formulate shitty arguments to place blame in one spot when it should be evenly distributed. That bothers me. Making up reasons why a coach is "an idiot" or "lacks balls" or "is a pussy", isn't going to go unchallenged by me.

You don't say that. So you have nothing to feel offended by. Hell, you've said this team needs an enema a few times already, and each time I chuckled. It's descriptive and it gets your point across. You're not taking pop shots at anyone, and you're not making up stuff to fit your agenda. You just want to flush and start over. More power to ya, man. No matter what happens, I think we both want the same results in the end (no pun intended).

One love, baby.


PEACE
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,971
Name
Stu
zn said:
bluecoconuts said:
The Rams haven't been afforded the luxury of developing players like Green Bay has.

The Packers also had a much stronger roster in 2008 following. In 2007 they went to the NFC Championship game, and lost in OT to the Giants. In 2008 they transitioned to Rodgers on offense, and started to revamp their defense a bit. Suffered a setback but was able to come back the next year.


You can't really compare the two, because the Rams have been pretty lackluster since the Greatest Show on Turf days. That's a long time of shitty drafting, and FO decisions, and it doesn't fix easily. 2009 was basically a wash for Spags, he tried to get some older guys who understood his defense (former Giants, etc) to help teach it to the players, and tried to rebuild the team on both sides of the ball. We can see the defense making improvements (although the run game needs to fix itself) and the offense shows flashes. We still need talent and most of all stability on both sides of the ball though. Which is why I want Spagnuolo here for another year.

I agree with your approach. Thompson took over in 2005 and he hired McCarthy in 2006. When they took over they inherited several key players. They added to those--for several consecutive drafts. That means that when the 2010 Packers went to the superbowl they had been drafting that team for 6 years.

In contrast, Spags inherited next to nothing in 2009. The situations are not remotely the same.

In 3 more years, compare the 2014 Rams to the 2010 Packers.

Ah... a rational look back at history. Sure hope there is a favorable comparison come 2014. Thanks guys.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
RamFan503 said:
zn said:
bluecoconuts said:
The Rams haven't been afforded the luxury of developing players like Green Bay has.

The Packers also had a much stronger roster in 2008 following. In 2007 they went to the NFC Championship game, and lost in OT to the Giants. In 2008 they transitioned to Rodgers on offense, and started to revamp their defense a bit. Suffered a setback but was able to come back the next year.


You can't really compare the two, because the Rams have been pretty lackluster since the Greatest Show on Turf days. That's a long time of shitty drafting, and FO decisions, and it doesn't fix easily. 2009 was basically a wash for Spags, he tried to get some older guys who understood his defense (former Giants, etc) to help teach it to the players, and tried to rebuild the team on both sides of the ball. We can see the defense making improvements (although the run game needs to fix itself) and the offense shows flashes. We still need talent and most of all stability on both sides of the ball though. Which is why I want Spagnuolo here for another year.

I agree with your approach. Thompson took over in 2005 and he hired McCarthy in 2006. When they took over they inherited several key players. They added to those--for several consecutive drafts. That means that when the 2010 Packers went to the superbowl they had been drafting that team for 6 years.

In contrast, Spags inherited next to nothing in 2009. The situations are not remotely the same.

In 3 more years, compare the 2014 Rams to the 2010 Packers.

Ah... a rational look back at history. Sure hope there is a favorable comparison come 2014. Thanks guys.

2014 the headlines will read "Can Sam Bradford repeat his MVP Super Bowl winning season?"


BOOK IT.
 

Anonymous

Guest
bluecoconuts said:
RamFan503 said:
zn said:
bluecoconuts said:
The Rams haven't been afforded the luxury of developing players like Green Bay has.

The Packers also had a much stronger roster in 2008 following. In 2007 they went to the NFC Championship game, and lost in OT to the Giants. In 2008 they transitioned to Rodgers on offense, and started to revamp their defense a bit. Suffered a setback but was able to come back the next year.


You can't really compare the two, because the Rams have been pretty lackluster since the Greatest Show on Turf days. That's a long time of shitty drafting, and FO decisions, and it doesn't fix easily. 2009 was basically a wash for Spags, he tried to get some older guys who understood his defense (former Giants, etc) to help teach it to the players, and tried to rebuild the team on both sides of the ball. We can see the defense making improvements (although the run game needs to fix itself) and the offense shows flashes. We still need talent and most of all stability on both sides of the ball though. Which is why I want Spagnuolo here for another year.

I agree with your approach. Thompson took over in 2005 and he hired McCarthy in 2006. When they took over they inherited several key players. They added to those--for several consecutive drafts. That means that when the 2010 Packers went to the superbowl they had been drafting that team for 6 years.

In contrast, Spags inherited next to nothing in 2009. The situations are not remotely the same.

In 3 more years, compare the 2014 Rams to the 2010 Packers.

Ah... a rational look back at history. Sure hope there is a favorable comparison come 2014. Thanks guys.

2014 the headlines will read "Can Sam Bradford repeat his MVP Super Bowl winning season?"


BOOK IT.

Indeed, the drunk tank for you. :boing:
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #28
squeaky wheel said:
bluecoconuts said:
RamFan503 said:
zn said:
bluecoconuts said:
The Rams haven't been afforded the luxury of developing players like Green Bay has.

The Packers also had a much stronger roster in 2008 following. In 2007 they went to the NFC Championship game, and lost in OT to the Giants. In 2008 they transitioned to Rodgers on offense, and started to revamp their defense a bit. Suffered a setback but was able to come back the next year.


You can't really compare the two, because the Rams have been pretty lackluster since the Greatest Show on Turf days. That's a long time of shitty drafting, and FO decisions, and it doesn't fix easily. 2009 was basically a wash for Spags, he tried to get some older guys who understood his defense (former Giants, etc) to help teach it to the players, and tried to rebuild the team on both sides of the ball. We can see the defense making improvements (although the run game needs to fix itself) and the offense shows flashes. We still need talent and most of all stability on both sides of the ball though. Which is why I want Spagnuolo here for another year.

I agree with your approach. Thompson took over in 2005 and he hired McCarthy in 2006. When they took over they inherited several key players. They added to those--for several consecutive drafts. That means that when the 2010 Packers went to the superbowl they had been drafting that team for 6 years.

In contrast, Spags inherited next to nothing in 2009. The situations are not remotely the same.

In 3 more years, compare the 2014 Rams to the 2010 Packers.

Ah... a rational look back at history. Sure hope there is a favorable comparison come 2014. Thanks guys.

2014 the headlines will read "Can Sam Bradford repeat his MVP Super Bowl winning season?"


BOOK IT.

Indeed, the drunk tank for you. :boing:
Oh ye of little faith. You're only a 3 pillar guy. Fire Squeaky!
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,971
Name
Stu
X said:
Finally, if you feel like you're being attacked by differing opinions, then I apologize for that. It was, I thought, a consensus that this board would provide refuge from the mass hysteria that plagues other boards. And by hysteria, I mean multiple threads with the words, "Fire", "Cut", "Sucks", "Loser", etc in every title.

Definitely the consensus I thought we had.

X said:
Maybe I'm trying to hard to keep that shit out of our house here.

Not as far as I'm concerned. Bitch slap me or anyone you want if you think they are straying from what this board has always been about. I think we can take it. At least I hope we can.

X said:
If it makes you feel convicted inside when I go to war over shitty arguments, then I suppose I could just dial it back a little.

No you can't. You might try but...

X said:
But you know me. You know my post history. You know my passion. Did you expect me to lay down?

Yep. Yep. Yep. Nope.

X said:
I don't have a problem with people who say things like, "You know, I think this whole thing needs to be rebooted. Get rid of the HC, GM, all the assistants, and let's see what happens with some new blood." That actually doesn't bother me. It's just someone saying they want to try something radically different. But to formulate shitty arguments to place blame in one spot when it should be evenly distributed. That bothers me. Making up reasons why a coach is "an idiot" or "lacks balls" or "is a pussy", isn't going to go unchallenged by me.

Or the many of us who feel the same.

X said:
One love, baby.

yep

Anyway, I came over here because of the tone of this board. We don't have to hold hands swap spit. But there are several other boards that are filled with angst. Shit - it is seasons like this where I frankly don't need MORE of that.

And King - I read your responses and posts. I don't get knee jerk or poo flinging out of any of them. You certainly have the right to be pissed at what you are seeing on the field. I think we should all be pissed. No one in this organization should be exempt from the fans' ire. I just think we ought to keep our football knowledge in mind when we start pointing at who to get rid of or what we KNOW is wrong with this team. And THAT is why I say - get rid of Loney and our problems are solved. :tooth:
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #32
RamFan503 said:
X said:
If it makes you feel convicted inside when I go to war over shitty arguments, then I suppose I could just dial it back a little.

No you can't. You might try but...
Yeah, well, you know me better than most I suppose. :lol:
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,971
Name
Stu
X said:
RamFan503 said:
X said:
If it makes you feel convicted inside when I go to war over shitty arguments, then I suppose I could just dial it back a little.

No you can't. You might try but...
Yeah, well, you know me better than most I suppose. :lol:

I just consider myself a decent judge of character. And you sir are a character. :cool:
 

Anonymous

Guest
RamFan503 said:
RamFan503 said:
X said:
Fire Squeaky!

Nah - think of the lost entertainment value. Give him his own column and let him roll.
\

On second thought - burn him at the stake. :sly:

Yep then you would put me on the menu. Squeaky steaks are guaranteed to give you the runs. :lmao:
 

Anonymous

Guest
X said:
squeaky wheel said:
bluecoconuts said:
RamFan503 said:
zn said:
bluecoconuts said:
The Rams haven't been afforded the luxury of developing players like Green Bay has.

The Packers also had a much stronger roster in 2008 following. In 2007 they went to the NFC Championship game, and lost in OT to the Giants. In 2008 they transitioned to Rodgers on offense, and started to revamp their defense a bit. Suffered a setback but was able to come back the next year.


You can't really compare the two, because the Rams have been pretty lackluster since the Greatest Show on Turf days. That's a long time of shitty drafting, and FO decisions, and it doesn't fix easily. 2009 was basically a wash for Spags, he tried to get some older guys who understood his defense (former Giants, etc) to help teach it to the players, and tried to rebuild the team on both sides of the ball. We can see the defense making improvements (although the run game needs to fix itself) and the offense shows flashes. We still need talent and most of all stability on both sides of the ball though. Which is why I want Spagnuolo here for another year.

I agree with your approach. Thompson took over in 2005 and he hired McCarthy in 2006. When they took over they inherited several key players. They added to those--for several consecutive drafts. That means that when the 2010 Packers went to the superbowl they had been drafting that team for 6 years.

In contrast, Spags inherited next to nothing in 2009. The situations are not remotely the same.

In 3 more years, compare the 2014 Rams to the 2010 Packers.

Ah... a rational look back at history. Sure hope there is a favorable comparison come 2014. Thanks guys.

2014 the headlines will read "Can Sam Bradford repeat his MVP Super Bowl winning season?"


BOOK IT.

Indeed, the drunk tank for you. :boing:
Oh ye of little faith. You're only a 3 pillar guy. Fire Squeaky!

Well I'd love to see Spags explain why the rush defense pillar never arrived here. :nono:
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,971
Name
Stu
squeaky wheel said:
RamFan503 said:
RamFan503 said:
X said:
Fire Squeaky!

Nah - think of the lost entertainment value. Give him his own column and let him roll.
\

On second thought - burn him at the stake. :sly:

Yep then you would put me on the menu. Squeaky steaks are guaranteed to give you the runs. :lmao:

Maybe a lovely meat pie?
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,971
Name
Stu
squeaky wheel said:
Well I'd love to see Spags explain why the rush defense pillar never arrived here. :nono:

It's being held up by the rush offense pillar and pass offense pillar train. Thought I'd lob you a sucker pitch.

But really, I'd hold my breath and wait for Spags to throw someone under the bus for not providing that particular pillar. It'll happen.... just hold.