I believe in Keenum! Too early to judge Goff

[Ramatik]

Hahaha my crappy attitude? Sorry I offended you have a great day and I hope you enjoy the season. I wasn't adversarial or aggressive sorry you mistook my post.

I love you brother.

Buttering Toast or Brain Surgeon.

 

[OldSchool]

I love you brother.

Buttering Toast or Brain Surgeon.

Or buttering a brain surgeons toast for her!

 

[dieterbrock]

If I heard right, No #1 pick has ever won his first game opening the season or some crap. Okay, sit him one game.

Kind of a stretch stat since Mariota, drafted 2nd, won his 1st game and RGIII also drafted 2nd, won his 1st game....

 

[So Ram]

I disagree. He did the wrong thing. Fisher has played this game with a number of talented rookies. It's not realistic to expect a rookie to "beat out" a veteran who already knows the system and playbook. It's a 100 meter sprint to the finish and the veteran is already 50 meters there before the rookie even lines up.

And you might say that this makes it the right move to sit him. I disagree. There are a whole hell of a lot of coaches around the league who manage to have rookies come in, start from the beginning, and play well. Fisher's system creates an illusion that the rookie isn't ready. Go back and look at the preseason performances of Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Andy Dalton, Cam Newton, and Jameis Winston. They made it seem like none of those guys were ready to start. Yet, those guys all played well as rookies. And it would have been crazy to start the veteran backups on those teams ahead of any of those guys.

Goff will get better each time he's on the field. Unfortunately, Keenum is Keenum. All Fisher has done is delay Goff's development.

I still have to go back to this. Case Keenum has earned his right to be the starter of The Rams. !! What your saying is Case Keenum has not IMPROVED ??
I know it is not just Jeff Fishers total decision to start Case Keenum. There are other coaches that have a say in it !!

Case Keenum & Boras are sort of connected at the hip. Boras took over as OC about the same time Case was the starting QB.At least after he came back from his head injury. The run this offense pretty soundly.All stats aside I really like the play calling.

Once Tavon & Gurley get in this offense is going to take off.Pharoh Copper & Spruuce getting hurt sort of stinks.
Those guys came in and got reps.They were earning there playing time. Just because you draft a guy number 1 over, doesn't mean you take competition out of it.
---From all accounts that I see is The Rams are going to give Jarred Goff a chance to start & see how that feels to him. The reasoning is he gets to not have to warm up on sidelines before entering the game.It is the change of perpetration .As for Case Keenum The Rams don't want to get him hurt. He is already at that finish line, waiting for Monday Night against The 49ers. He is probably already studying some of the game plan.

 

[OldSchool]

Goff is ready to go week 1! The guys he's had blocking for him and "catching" the ball for him? Not so much!


View: https://twitter.com/LedyardNFLDraft/status/771392600028753922

 

[jrry32]

I still have to go back to this. Case Keenum has earned his right to be the starter of The Rams. !! What your saying is Case Keenum has not IMPROVED ??
I know it is not just Jeff Fishers total decision to start Case Keenum. There are other coaches that have a say in it !!

Case Keenum & Boras are sort of connected at the hip. Boras took over as OC about the same time Case was the starting QB.At least after he came back from his head injury. The run this offense pretty soundly.All stats aside I really like the play calling.

Once Tavon & Gurley get in this offense is going to take off.Pharoh Copper & Spruuce getting hurt sort of stinks.
Those guys came in and got reps.They were earning there playing time. Just because you draft a guy number 1 over, doesn't mean you take competition out of it.
---From all accounts that I see is The Rams are going to give Jarred Goff a chance to start & see how that feels to him. The reasoning is he gets to not have to warm up on sidelines before entering the game.It is the change of perpetration .As for Case Keenum The Rams don't want to get him hurt. He is already at that finish line, waiting for Monday Night against The 49ers. He is probably already studying some of the game plan.

Case Keenum lost the right to be the starter of the Rams in Week 17 last year. When you draft a guy #1 after trading a hell of a lot to move up to #1, you don't sit him behind a backup caliber QB unless there are glaring mechanical flaws in his game that need fixing.

No, you THINK it's a problem b/c you are hellbent on discrediting any potential positive Case Keenum brings. No one is expecting CK to throw for insane numbers. That's not his job. His is to hold the fort until Jared Goff is ready.

That is his job. He's the QB. His job is to produce passing yards and TDs. If he can't do that, he should be riding the bench.

What fatbot said isn't true, either. He mentioned Case being a clone of Austin Davis, Shaun Hill, Kellen Clemmons. Case doesn't turn it over, and I'm basing that assessment on past results.

As Rams, those QBs had the following turnovers:

Austin Davis: 9 INTs, 5 fumbles, 3 lost.

Shaun Hill: 7 INTs, 7 fumbles, 1 lost.

Kellen Clemens: 7 INTs, 7 fumbles, 4 lost (only counting his significant playing time, these numbers get worse if you add the other 2 seasons)

Case Keenum: 1 INT, 4 fumbles, 3 lost (all 3 against Baltimore).

That's the biggest positive Case Keenum brings. He doesn't make that many mistakes.

That's the problem. The biggest positive he brings is his ability to avoid mistakes, not his ability to put the ball in the end-zone.

He does if he stays healthy and doesn't give games away.

No, he doesn't. You're simply trading points for turnovers. If Keenum is giving us bottom 5 QB play, he's not keeping things steady. Keenum not turning it over doesn't change that if he's also not putting the ball in the end-zone.

That can be said about any team with any QB. From the best to the worst. It's a team game. That's not news.

That's dead wrong. There are certainly QBs in this league that will win you games when the defense, running game, or special teams have off days. It happens all the time. In fact, over half the teams in the NFL have QBs capable of doing that.

No crap. It gets harder with an overwhelmed rookie that could potentially be mistake prone at this point and time.

I don't agree. You seem to prefer playing not to lose. I prefer playing to win. Goff will make more mistakes. He'll also make more positive plays. I'll trade turnovers for points. The GSOT had no issues doing the same.

Again, only YOU seem to think it is.

If I am the only one that believes it's a problem, this fan-base has a problem. I have a hard time believing that I'm the only one who thinks it's a problem that the rest of the team has to play outstanding football in order for us to win with Keenum.

They drafted Jared to be the QB of the future. The future isn't now. But it will be sooner rather than later.

They drafted Goff to be the QB of the present and future. That's why they took him #1.

Sigh. Only you. I see it has a huge luxury.

For you.

bullcrap. SF gets Blaine Gabbert. What if Dak gets hurt? Minnesota is gonna get turnover prone Shaun Hill and a UDFA rookie.

I doubt it's only me. In fact, I know many others who share the same opinion. I'm not the only one pissed with how this was handled.

It's definitely not bullshit. Gabbert arguably outplayed Keenum last year (which isn't encouraging) and Dallas fans wouldn't trade Dak for Keenum. Minnesota is the only one of those teams who would be okay with Keenum as their starter.

Frankly, I'd rather have Keenum than Gabbert but neither do anything for me as a starting QB.

 

[LACHAMP46]

Whoa ho-ho @So Ram ......

If I am the only one that believes it's a problem, this fan-base has a problem. I have a hard time believing that I'm the only one who thinks it's a problem that the rest of the team has to play outstanding football in order for us to win with Keenum.

Naw man, you're NOT the only one....in fact, down by a score, didn't everyone notice the feeling that, well, the game is over...If anything Kurt & Bulger showed me, it's that despite inadequacies & deficiencies, our offense could overcome almost anything...esp. their own mistakes....I miss that feeling...I felt it a little in the preseason game one, when Mannion went through those 3rd teamers...in fact, watching SPRUCE in there, reminded me of a ricky prohel/danny A type player...and I definitely wanted him on the team...(the injury has me feeling a lil DX-ish now) but still....
Goff should start...that's the fastest way to get this kid up to speed...You guys probably never saw Jim Everett...Dieter Brock...rookies...Pat Haden...Vince Ferragamo...I think they all played & started as rookies (well, probably not Vince, but it makes my argument stronger:yess His passes are different for a reason...The pass to cooper was...just..pure Dan Marino-ish....into the teeth of the defense....the dimes to Thomas...that throw to Duke...if you can't see the talent, and ready to live with the bad stuff, don't know what to tell you...:giveup:
Personally, it's all about the playoffs..you're not really getting better unless you're getting into the postseason...

 

[dieterbrock]

I have a hard time believing that I'm the only one who thinks it's a problem that the rest of the team has to play outstanding football in order for us to win with Keenum.

Its just not possible to not recognize this.
Keenum couldn't beat a San Fran team that had mailed it in, and was giving up 27 points per game.
The Rams scored only 16 points, and Keenum looked awful

 

[Dan Poplawski]

I too have found a renewed confidence in Keenum, he's dedicated, a hard worker and I think he'll lead us to the playoffs.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Its just not possible to not recognize this.
Keenum couldn't beat a San Fran team that had mailed it in, and was giving up 27 points per game.
The Rams scored only 16 points, and Keenum looked awful

Did he? I actually missed that game. His numbers weren't bad. I might go back and watch it tomorrow. Judging by the box score and knowing how many of our key players were "out" it looks like the defense had alot to do with losing by 3 points.
Gabbert threw for 354 yds with a TD and a pick. They also rushed for 100 yds. Then again our D only allowed one TD.
I dunno.

I don't think the vibe around here says that Keenum is starter material, just that as far as week 1 goes...he gives the Rams the better chance to win in week 1(if it had to be decided right now). I tend to agree with that. He doesn't make a whole of plays but unlike Hill, Clemons, Davis, Foles before him he doesn't make back breaking mistakes either.
Whether we agree or not i think that's what it comes down to with Fisher. He may not be willing to let Goff make those mistakes early on through the first 4 or 5 weeks. History has shown that a slow start is a death sentence to make the playoffs. We know this...Lol. I also think there's something to be learned from a rookie QB by watching and observing a REAL game or two or three while holding a clipboard before getting in there. That's debatable.

 

[dieterbrock]

Did he? I actually missed that game. His numbers weren't bad. I might go back and watch it tomorrow. Judging by the box score and knowing how many of our key players were "out" it looks like the defense had alot to do with losing by 3 points.
Gabbert threw for 354 yds with a TD and a pick. They also rushed for 100 yds. Then again our D only allowed one TD.
I dunno.

I don't think the vibe around here says that Keenum is starter material, just that as far as week 1 goes...he gives the Rams the better chance to win in week 1(if it had to be decided right now). I tend to agree with that. He doesn't make a whole of plays but unlike Hill, Clemons, Davis, Foles before him he doesn't make back breaking mistakes either.
Whether we agree or not i think that's what it comes down to with Fisher. He may not be willing to let Goff make those mistakes early on through the first 4 or 5 weeks. History has shown that a slow start is a death sentence to make the playoffs. We know this...Lol. I also think there's something to be learned from a rookie QB by watching and observing a REAL game or two or three while holding a clipboard before getting in there. That's debatable.

Rams only TD was because they had an INT returned to the 3 yard line.
Rams had like 75 yards of total offense in the 2nd half. It was ugly.

 

[jrry32]

Did he? I actually missed that game. His numbers weren't bad. I might go back and watch it tomorrow. Judging by the box score and knowing how many of our key players were "out" it looks like the defense had alot to do with losing by 3 points.
Gabbert threw for 354 yds with a TD and a pick. They also rushed for 100 yds. Then again our D only allowed one TD.
I dunno.

I don't think the vibe around here says that Keenum is starter material, just that as far as week 1 goes...he gives the Rams the better chance to win in week 1(if it had to be decided right now). I tend to agree with that. He doesn't make a whole of plays but unlike Hill, Clemons, Davis, Foles before him he doesn't make back breaking mistakes either.
Whether we agree or not i think that's what it comes down to with Fisher. He may not be willing to let Goff make those mistakes early on through the first 4 or 5 weeks. History has shown that a slow start is a death sentence to make the playoffs. We know this...Lol. I also think there's something to be learned from a rookie QB by watching and observing a REAL game or two or three while holding a clipboard before getting in there. That's debatable.

The defense gave up 16 points prior to OT. And 7 of the 16 came on a play that should have been called offensive pass interference.

It seems a bit unfair to me to blame the defense for not giving up less than 16 points prior to OT. Keenum's stats weren't bad, but they were mediocre. However, the stat that should bother you is the fact that we went 3 of 13 on 3rd downs in that game. I think it's kind of amazing that we lost a game where we rushed for 133 yards and our defense only gave up 16 points prior to OT. Some will disagree but that game sealed Keenum's fate with me. It became clear to me that he was not starting material and would hold this team back if we had to start him in 2016. Now, here we are.

 

[dieterbrock]

The defense gave up 16 points prior to OT. And 7 of the 16 came on a play that should have been called offensive pass interference.

It seems a bit unfair to me to blame the defense for not giving up less than 16 points prior to OT. Keenum's stats weren't bad, but they were mediocre. However, the stat that should bother you is the fact that we went 3 of 13 on 3rd downs in that game. I think it's kind of amazing that we lost a game where we rushed for 133 yards and our defense only gave up 16 points prior to OT. Some will disagree but that game sealed Keenum's fate with me. It became clear to me that he was not starting material and would hold this team back if we had to start him in 2016. Now, here we are.

IIRC Keenum had 1 really long pass play early in the game for like 60 yards which also made his stats misleading

 

[maddogmrb]

You guys blame Keenum for the poor offensive stats in the SF game last year. Remember, he doesn't call his own plays. The poor stats are the result of ultra conservative play calling by the coaching staff. How many passes did Keenum miss? How many int's did he throw? No, the stats are a result of the coaching and not Keenum. Keenum can light it up if the coaches open it up for him.

 

[jrry32]

IIRC Keenum had 1 really long pass play early in the game for like 60 yards which also made his stats misleading

Yep, a 54 yarder to Britt on the first play of the Rams' second drive.

But that game is a great illustration of my point about the Rams needing every other part of the team to be near perfect for them to win with Keenum.
Defense? Allowed a lot of yardage but held SF to 16 points during regulation. Did their jobs.
Running game? Up and down but still produced 133 yards and 4+ yards per carry. Did their jobs.
Hekker? Averaged over 50 yards per punt. Did his job.
Zuerlein? Struggled. Missed two kicks (48 yards and 52 yards) that would have been the decider in the game.

Therein lies the problem. Almost every other part of the team posted quality performance. But a bad game from Zuerlein ended up being the difference between a win and a loss. That's the conundrum Keenum puts us in. We have no margin for error with him at QB.

 

[jrry32]

You guys blame Keenum for the poor offensive stats in the SF game last year. Remember, he doesn't call his own plays. The poor stats are the result of ultra conservative play calling by the coaching staff. How many passes did Keenum miss? How many int's did he throw? No, the stats are a result of the coaching and not Keenum. Keenum can light it up if the coaches open it up for him.

When has Keenum ever shown that?

I believe that the ultra conservative play-calling stemmed from the limited QB under center.

Not to mention the fact that Keenum is a NFL QB. He has progressions. If he wants to go vertical, he can.

 

[maddogmrb]

When has Keenum ever shown that?

I believe that the ultra conservative play-calling stemmed from the limited QB under center.

Not to mention the fact that Keenum is a NFL QB. He has progressions. If he wants to go vertical, he can.

He showed it with the Texans and he's showed it with the Rams when they call the right plays for him (54 yarder in SF game as example). He also showed it A LOT more in college than Goff. Also, he's been limited by the quality of his receivers and oline (just as you cry about Goff). Hopefully, the receivers will be better this year (maybe, maybe not) and the oline appears to be better except it appears they haven't even had a RT on the field with the offense and hopefully the coaches will open things up more with aggressive play calling.

 

[jrry32]

He showed it with the Texans and he's showed it with the Rams when they call the right plays for him (54 yarder in SF game as example). He also showed it A LOT more in college than Goff. Also, he's been limited by the quality of his receivers and oline (just as you cry about Goff). Hopefully, the receivers will be better this year (maybe, maybe not) and the oline appears to be better except it appears they haven't even had a RT on the field with the offense and hopefully the coaches will open things up more with aggressive play calling.

Hitting the occasional deep pass doesn't make you a gunslinger. When did Keenum show it with the Texans? He threw for 11 TDs in 10 starts.

What he did in college isn't relevant now that he's going into his fifth year in the NFL. But no, he didn't show a lot more in college than Goff.

 

[maddogmrb]

The Texans were a mess of a team when he took over the first time. He looked good when he had time to throw the ball. As for college vs Goff, check the NCAA record books.

 

[dieterbrock]

Yep, a 54 yarder to Britt on the first play of the Rams' second drive.

But that game is a great illustration of my point about the Rams needing every other part of the team to be near perfect for them to win with Keenum.
Defense? Allowed a lot of yardage but held SF to 16 points during regulation. Did their jobs.
Running game? Up and down but still produced 133 yards and 4+ yards per carry. Did their jobs.
Hekker? Averaged over 50 yards per punt. Did his job.
Zuerlein? Struggled. Missed two kicks (48 yards and 52 yards) that would have been the decider in the game.

Therein lies the problem. Almost every other part of the team posted quality performance. But a bad game from Zuerlein ended up being the difference between a win and a loss. That's the conundrum Keenum puts us in. We have no margin for error with him at QB.

Basically 9 offensive points in the game