New QB Time!

[-X-]

Something that really was key with that team were a few under the radar sort of second tier FA signings that really jelled and filled rolls. Mike Jones certainly, but Collins at LB was another, Ray Agnew ended up being a huge addition as a fiesty run stuffing DT and Tom Nutten was an amazing find out of Canada and made the left side of that Oline (with Pace) dominating.

Yep. Lots of excellent blue collar guys to go with the razzle dazzle of our skill position players.
And how do you leave off Jeff "Cankles" Zgonina? Our multi-faceted TE/KR/DT? (yes, he had a kick return - lol)

 

[jrry32]

Next year? I totally agree. This year? Not many options available.

That's why I recommend seeing if we have a young option on this team(Davis). If not, we gotta find one.

 

[-X-]

That's why I recommend seeing if we have a young option on this team(Davis). If not, we gotta find one.

Everyone wants their curiosity satisfied in that manner, but it's likely not going to happen. Fisher already said in his "show" that Clemens gives them the best chance to succeed right now (because Davis doesn't know half of what Clemens knows), so that's what they'll be doing. It will take a monumental collapse by Clemens to replace him with Davis, but I'm not rooting for *that* to happen. If Davis works his way into the lineup then I'll be hoping for him to make the most of it and for him to be successful, but none of these retreads or UDFAs are the answer going forward anyway, IMO.

 

[Zaphod]

What's insulting is that they keep doing the same things while telling us it will get better. For example, how many games, going back to last season did we wonder why the CB's played so far off the ball. Or, why did we have to endure watching DR run it up the middle again and again and again. Or, why did it take until the 8th game of the season to unleash the D-line? We all talked about these things here, the local analysts and former Rams pretty much made the same observations, but it took quite a few games before these things were changed. I find that baffling.

In the world in which I breathe, think and eat, we call them safe-to-fail experiments, where you intentionally design and introduce new things in such a way that it won't be catestrophic to the overall system if they fail. That's how you test, that's how you learn, and that's how you determine what works. Sorry, but I see far too little of that approach by this coaching staff. And this absolutely drives me insane, epsecially when I hear them state the same rhetoric over and over again. Things won't get better if you don't try something new, and I will guarantee you of this.

Put Austin in at QB this weekend and you'll draw me back to the TV set to see how he does. Or let's see Bailey in the slot or wide-out. Or, perhaps we can get some TA lined-up outside the numbers. Give me something. Otherwise, I'll spend the day with my kids at the park.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this has more to do with match ups than anything else.

The corners were instructed to play tight because they weren't threatened by the wide receivers.

The defensive line looked so good because they played 8 men in the box. They knew Seattle wanted to run. They said no. Make the pass work first. And this is all due to the fact they trusted the match up between the corners and receivers. They knew they could play tight because Quinn and Long would get pressure on the QB going against backup tackles.

It is what it is, no more or less. Due to their ability to take advantage of certain match ups, the game wasn't as bad as it was thought to become. They're still the same defense that struggled against the 49ers offensive line.

I'll say again that I think we stand a good chance of rushing well in the next three games, which gives the defense the time off of the field they need and really opens up the passing attack. I'm just saying that the season isn't over yet.

 

[jrry32]

Everyone wants their curiosity satisfied in that manner, but it's likely not going to happen. Fisher already said in his "show" that Clemens gives them the best chance to succeed right now (because Davis doesn't know half of what Clemens knows), so that's what they'll be doing. It will take a monumental collapse by Clemens to replace him with Davis, but I'm not rooting for *that* to happen. If Davis works his way into the lineup then I'll be hoping for him to make the most of it and for him to be successful, but none of these retreads or UDFAs are the answer going forward anyway, IMO.

But there is an answer sitting on the market...

And trust me, the market would appreciate it if you got that answer off of it. It wasn't made to hold a 350 pound man. :wink:

 

[-X-]

But there is an answer sitting on the market...

And trust me, the market would appreciate it if you got that answer off of it. It wasn't made to hold a 350 pound man. :wink:

Yeesh.

Kinda surprised VY hasn't gotten a call, but then again, maybe I'm not that surprised.

 

[Faceplant]

I found our guy......

 

[-X-]

I found our guy......

If only...

We can pair him with our new RB too.

 

[Faceplant]

^^ Brilliant. I fuggin worship Bundy. FOUR TDs in one game. FOUR!!! Who does he think he is...Az Hakim??

 

[fearsomefour]

Yep. Lots of excellent blue collar guys to go with the razzle dazzle of our skill position players.
And how do you leave off Jeff "Cankles" Zgonina? Our multi-faceted TE/KR/DT? (yes, he had a kick return - lol)

Yeah Zgonina was key too. He and Agnew both played run stuffer to Farrs' speed rusher. Also Jeff Robinson, LS/TE was a good versaltile player. Zgonina had a good career once he left St. Louis also. Some guys, like Andy McCollum had their best years in St. Louis.

 

[RamFan503]

Been out for a week so I'm just getting back to this conversation. The main problem I have with trying out other QB options in order to see if one would be viable as a back-up NEXT year is that you seriously threaten the development of the rest of the young guns on your offense. There are enough difficulties already with a QB that knows the offense even better than Sam. Put a QB in that is not real familiar with the offense or the players and I believe the young guys could potentially actually regress and have a real possibility of an out of sync QB hanging them out to dry.

I'd take my chances with Clemens - knowing that an upgrade at QB2 needs to be addressed in the off season. Or does it need to be addressed at all? I still say there are far worse options at #2 if you look around the league.

 

[-X-]

I know the coaching staff ain't going to make any changes, and I know that the media won't challenge Snisher, and I know that Fish won't address the issue on his own when speaking to the public. Soooo, we're just left here to take it up the gazoo. Just one more thing we're left here to be confused about... and to have those "in the know" insinuate that we're just not knowledgeable or cognitive enough to understand the underlying reasons for leaving Kellen in as our starter.

Am I missing something here, or am I calling it like it is?

You're missing something. :razz:

 

[bwdenverram]

I don't think Fisher will let another QB play until we either (1) see an injury or (2) are eliminated from the playoff race.
Clemens has played well enough to keep starting IMO. And if the defense, ST and young receivers continue to step up like yesterday, I don't see any reason to make any changes.
Now if week 13 comes around and we're out, by all means let Davis or Quinn play.

 

[Stranger]

You're missing something. :razz:

What? Please tell me.

I can't figure anything out this season. I admit it. I'm totally dumbfounded

 

[-X-]

What? Please tell me.

I can't figure anything out this season. I admit it. I'm totally dumbfounded

Well, you wanted to know what the underlying reason was for the Rams' coaching staff leaving Clemens in as starter.
The answer is obvious. He gives them the best chance to win with Bradford out.

No conspiracies, no ulterior motives, no stubbornness. That's just how it is.

 

[Stranger]

Well, you wanted to know what the underlying reason was for the Rams' coaching staff leaving Clemens in as starter.
The answer is obvious. He gives them the best chance to win with Bradford out.

No conspiracies, no ulterior motives, no stubbornness. That's just how it is.

Well, I wouldn't mind seeing Austin in there for a game. Then we'd really know.