Really Quick Rams Trivia Question

  • 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.
I can think of 2 3 or 4 - two are tricky (did they start or did they sub in)
 
OldSchool said:
I too shall break the rules ...
Click to expand...
1699305258848.png
 
I'd say the answer is 1 and "possibly" 2, depending on how to define "starter." Is it who took the field on the first play, or who took the "majority" of snaps... or?

Rams played a lot of nickel vs. Packers.

And yes, amazing how much turnover can occur in 2 years.
 
I came up with 2.. maybe even just 1
 
Now do Starters in SB LIII and Starters in SB LVI......

Things change pretty fast in the Nor For Long League.

My bet is it doesn't take us 4 years to get back to the SB.....
 
RhodyRams said:
I came up with 2.. maybe even just 1
Click to expand...
Well the 2 others (other than who for sure started that are named above) that started yesterday and might have started in the Superbowl have names that start with a letter H and a Letter R.
 
Rams8821 said:
Now do Starters in SB LII and Starters in SB LVI......

Things change pretty fast in the Nor For Long League.

My bet is it doesn't take us 4 years to get back to the SB.....
Click to expand...
There were quite a few starters that played in both 52 and 54
 
  • Not So Sure
Reactions: fanotodd
Rams8821 said:
Uh no there wasnt.....
Click to expand...
Faulk Warner the OL for the most part Holt Bruce and a few others on defense

I would say at minimum 11 starters out of 22 - that's quite a few to me
 
3
 
Last edited:
XXXIVwin said:
I'd say the answer is 1 and "possibly" 2, depending on how to define "starter." Is it who took the field on the first play, or who took the "majority" of snaps... or?

Rams played a lot of nickel vs. Packers.

And yes, amazing how much turnover can occur in 2 years.
Click to expand...
Aw crap, I meant 2 for sure and possibly 3.
 
1+3-1+7-6+5+3-7-2 = 3
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back