Reflecting on Pre-Season Game 1
- Thread starter libertadrocks
- Start date
-
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.
These replacement refs too. FUCK better? :lmao:
Seriously. The league needs to get their shit together or this whole season will be screwed. Easily influenced, and blind as shit.
Seriously. The league needs to get their shit together or this whole season will be screwed. Easily influenced, and blind as shit.
Yamahopper
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2010
- Messages
- 3,838
After re-watching the game I think there will be a new since of urgency in Rams park tomorrow. Much of it on the players part.
But again it was just the first pre-season game. I didn't like much of what I saw but there is time and options to improve the team.
But again it was just the first pre-season game. I didn't like much of what I saw but there is time and options to improve the team.
I DID like seeing the deep shots being taken. Not sure if they were by design, or Givens was simply getting behind guys, but it was nice to see. Now if they can only connect on a few of those.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2010
- Messages
- 12,111
- Name
- Rambeau
Getting Wells back will change the whole complexity of the line like a domino effect. With Wells back, Turner could potentially be moved to LG, bettering both of those positions, which strengthens the group. And I think Watkins will be in the lineup from what I saw, possibly moving Dahl to RT. I have faith that our coaches will figure this out.Ramhusker said:
X said:That's about right.DR RAM said:
It's this.
Not this.
.
Right. But this is not really useful. When I said I wasn't concerned, first, I didn't mean about the first exhibition game--hardly a cause of concern (Rams OL has been shakey in openers before and gotten it together).
And when I disagreed with being concerned, I meant image #1, not #2. It's kind of a straw man to suggest anyone was saying it was #2. Which I already said in the original discussion.
#1 was precisely what I was disagreeing with. Wells will be back in time for the season. (Yes we all know all about the magnificent magic of reps.) There's time for Saffold to get into rhythm. Rams have looked shakey in exhibition openers before. The errors I saw today were all mental, not guys just flat getting beat. Etc.
From my perspective, if we want to be concerned, then, we should wait till game three. If they're shakey then, it could be an issue. If not, then, just like 2010, people are concerned about an exhibition opener than really is no indication of anything at all.
Just clarifying.
-X-
Medium-sized Lebowski
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 35,576
- Name
- The Dude
<sigh>zn said:X said:That's about right.DR RAM said:
It's this.
Not this.
.
Right. But this is not really useful. When I said I wasn't concerned, first, I didn't mean about the first exhibition game--hardly a cause of concern (Rams OL has been shakey in openers before and gotten it together).
And when I disagreed with being concerned, I meant image #1, not #2. It's kind of a straw man to suggest anyone was saying it was #2. Which I already said in the original discussion.
#1 was precisely what I was disagreeing with. Wells will be back in time for the season. (Yes we all know all about the magnificent magic of reps.) There's time for Saffold to get into rhythm. Rams have looked shakey in exhibition openers before. The errors I saw today were all mental, not guys just flat getting beat. Etc.
From my perspective, if we want to be concerned, then, we should wait till game three. If they're shakey then, it could be an issue. If not, then, just like 2010, people are concerned about an exhibition opener than really is no indication of anything at all.
Just clarifying.
Listen. Honestly. This isn't about you. This is about me.
If I'm 'concerned' (no matter how anyone wants to try to qualify it), then I'm concerned. If you're not, that's great. But you can't disagree with me being concerned. That's like disagreeing that I'm 6'1. I just am and there's nothing you can do about it. Unless you make me stand in a hole. Standing in a hole isn't going to reduce my concern though.
I'm not basing it on this preseason game either. If you remember, I brought it up before the preseason game. Again, this is just my thing we're talking about. Others may share my concerns, and others may not. Either way, you can't disagree with someone else's concerns. You can only state that YOU don't have any. I'm not going to tell you that I disagree with your feelings. How could I?
"I'm scared. There's an enormous wolf in my house."
"I disagree. That wolf is probably a vegetarian, so I'd wait and see if it eats you first."
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2010
- Messages
- 12,111
- Name
- Rambeau
It was useful to me. I like humor.zn said:X said:That's about right.DR RAM said:
It's this.
Not this.
.
Right. But this is not really useful. When I said I wasn't concerned, first, I didn't mean about the first exhibition game--hardly a cause of concern (Rams OL has been shakey in openers before and gotten it together).
And when I disagreed with being concerned, I meant image #1, not #2. It's kind of a straw man to suggest anyone was saying it was #2. Which I already said in the original discussion.
#1 was precisely what I was disagreeing with. Wells will be back in time for the season. (Yes we all know all about the magnificent magic of reps.) There's time for Saffold to get into rhythm. Rams have looked shakey in exhibition openers before. The errors I saw today were all mental, not guys just flat getting beat. Etc.
From my perspective, if we want to be concerned, then, we should wait till game three. If they're shakey then, it could be an issue. If not, then, just like 2010, people are concerned about an exhibition opener than really is no indication of anything at all.
Just clarifying.
It great that you know exactly when everyone else should have their own personal concerns. I don't have this kind of insight into other people's souls. The 2010 reference again. Do you have any other examples? Because it's hard for me to use 2010 as a winning formula for this year. Because if this game is no indication of anything at all, then why does a preseason game in 2010 mean everything to you?
I just don't get why you don't want me or anyone else to be interestingly engaged in the offensive line play.
You may not see what I or others see. That's OK, it's no big deal, but because you don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
There were mental mistakes a plenty. One of my concerns is that there just isn't a lot of depth at the tackle position. There is no backup at LT, and our RT's are not very good at this point. It makes that position very weak as of this point. Guys did get flat out beat in this game.
DR RAM said:
That has exactly nothing to do with anything I said. I'm discussing the reality. The actual Rams OL. Any opinion about them is also an assessment of them. No one is telling anyone how to "feel" about anything. So let's stop pretending I am intruding on your feelings and remember that what we're really doing in this discussion is comparing assessments. I am in a discussion where we are comparing assessments of the actual OL, not personal feelings. I don't address the latter in any way shape or form. I will even go so far as to say I don't even register personal feelings on this.
And the word "concerns" means more than personal feelings--it also means objective points of skepticism about the viability of something. That;s how I am using the word.
If someone has a negative assessment of the Rams OL at this point, then, I disagree with it for reasons stated. It's okay to disagree with that right. I assume.
-X-
Medium-sized Lebowski
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 35,576
- Name
- The Dude
I feel bad for anyone who's casually reading this thread, because it's getting circular.
Why, zn, do you think anyone would take umbrage to your replies? If I didn't think you were trying to regulate my concerns, then it wouldn't be an issue for me. Unless I'm ENTIRELY misreading everything you've said in response to my concerns. I mean, it all started when I said MY CONCERNS about the O-line were warranted (again, "to me") and you said "Not so fast," and went on to tell me how it was worse in 2010.
How am I to take that? That I shouldn't be investing much into what I'm seeing now? Well, okay. But here's the thing. It doesn't work that way *for me*. I'm trying to tell you that 2010 doesn't mean anything to me. That's like saying they were bad in 1965. I don't care about that. My only focus is on how *this* O-line is shaking out. They could be fine, and I hope they are, but again; I still have some (I need another word for...) concerns about them as a group. Injuries will destroy any line, but this one (again, *to me*) is one injury away from having to really shuffle things around.
Let me put it this way. If, in response to all of your non-concerns about this O-line, I kept telling you that I disagree with your views and went on to cite a year wherein they started out fine in preseason but weren't very effective later on, would it matter to you? Would it sway your opinion?
Sorry casual viewers.
Now go make me a portabella mushroom sammich since you're just standing around doing nothing else.
Why, zn, do you think anyone would take umbrage to your replies? If I didn't think you were trying to regulate my concerns, then it wouldn't be an issue for me. Unless I'm ENTIRELY misreading everything you've said in response to my concerns. I mean, it all started when I said MY CONCERNS about the O-line were warranted (again, "to me") and you said "Not so fast," and went on to tell me how it was worse in 2010.
How am I to take that? That I shouldn't be investing much into what I'm seeing now? Well, okay. But here's the thing. It doesn't work that way *for me*. I'm trying to tell you that 2010 doesn't mean anything to me. That's like saying they were bad in 1965. I don't care about that. My only focus is on how *this* O-line is shaking out. They could be fine, and I hope they are, but again; I still have some (I need another word for...) concerns about them as a group. Injuries will destroy any line, but this one (again, *to me*) is one injury away from having to really shuffle things around.
Let me put it this way. If, in response to all of your non-concerns about this O-line, I kept telling you that I disagree with your views and went on to cite a year wherein they started out fine in preseason but weren't very effective later on, would it matter to you? Would it sway your opinion?
Sorry casual viewers.
Now go make me a portabella mushroom sammich since you're just standing around doing nothing else.
X said:
I have no idea why anyone would read me as talking about regulating personal emotional expressions of subjective "feelings." In fact, I find the implication that that is what I was doing or intending to do to be insulting. Which is why I said what I said last post.
As usual, near as I can figure, what we have here is just miscommunication, and as often happens on the net, miscommunication leads some to question others motives--always a problematical move. That is always one of the worst things that happens on the net. It's not "oh hey look we're miscommunicating" it's "I invent this bad motive for you."
To me the phrase "I have concerns about Issue A" has always only been a phrase meaning "this is my assessment of Issue A." So, "I have concerns about the fuel pump" in relation to a car means "there is an issue with the fuel pump--I think the fuel pump has problems." It's just a way of saying something. That's how I have always used that word in discussion and I have never in my entire existence as a speaker, reader, or writer of english seen it used differently.
And I said all that, pretty much, last post. I don't know why it wasn't clear.
-X-
Medium-sized Lebowski
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 35,576
- Name
- The Dude
I don't see how.zn said:
I have concerns about the O-line.
My assessment of the O-line is ... (good, bad)
Mutually exclusive statements.
At any rate, it doesn't matter anymore. Let's just do it your way. My assessment of the line is that they haven't played enough games to tell me anything definitive. My concerns are that, at present, there may not be enough quality depth and the starters at RT, C, and LG are question marks at this point.
What Boudreau was able to do with the Falcons is immaterial to me. What the two remaining players from the 2010 O-line were able to do in 2010 is immaterial to me. The entire *thing* appears to be on shaky ground, but I could be entirely off on that and only time will tell. Not speculation; not past performances being used as future indicators; only time. When they've played enough games to give me the ability to form an intelligent argument about their effectiveness/ineffectiveness, then I'll do that. But for now, I just have lingering concerns about how it'll all take shape.
Hope that clarifies my position.
X said:
Hence. Miscommunication. Hence. I explained myself and what I meant.
To me "I have concerns about the OL" is identical to "I assess the OL in this way." To me those are identical statements. I read them, and always have, as just different ways of putting the same thing.
In fact, as I said, this is the first time in my life where it was ever proposed that those types of phrases are not identical. Which just means that way of seeing the discussion informed my posts.
For that matter when I intend to express a personal feeling I don't wish to debate, I wouldn't use that phrase--I would say something like "well, this makes me nervous" or "I get a bad feeling about that, personally" or something.
In fact, until I realized what was going on (last post) I took it as completely the other way around. Here I was thinking I was in this discussion happily comparing assessments, and all of a sudden I am supposed to be doing these bad things. It came completely out of the blue and came across as insulting. ("You are regulating my feelings" is insulting. If one has no intention of doing any such thing.)
You don't have to see how. You just only have to respect that that's where I was coming from. Like I said, it's miscommunication. No one is doing anything to anyone.
bluecoconuts
Legend
- Joined
- May 28, 2011
- Messages
- 13,073
Although (barely) on topic, things started to get a little personal, don't forget the rules guys. It applies to everyone. We're all Rams fans here, and we're all entitled to our own feelings. So that being said lets just talk about the game, if we want to discuss the O-line more in depth (with respect of course) we can go into another thread so that people can discuss the game as a whole here.
Otherwise I'll just assume it's time to pop it and lock it. :ww:
Otherwise I'll just assume it's time to pop it and lock it. :ww:
