Tim Walton Out

  • 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.
RamEERS said:
Fisher's other buddy Gregg Williams?
Click to expand...
Good call

I will come out and say that I also was not so happy with the regression of the defense. I'm sure that there will be a big philosophy change with Williams here; I wonder if Blake will come back.
 
Ramifications said:
Finnegan looked done, though, even before the reported after the fact eye injury, and it didn't look all due to scheme, but perhaps he would have looked better in his accustomed press scheme. He just looked terrible in every phase, pass coverage and run support. It is like he hit the wall and exploded in one offseason, which would have been hard to predict, as he was only about 28?
Click to expand...

I don't think he was healthy at any point during the season. Even watching him in training camp, he just didn't seem to have the jump that he had the previous year. I think they kept it very quiet, knowing they had to sink or swim with him, given the overall youth and inexperience of the secondary.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see him brought back, and for him to make a statement as to the type of PRO he is and have a bounce back season. Thy guy has been a quality player for too long, to suddenly forget how to play without it being physical.
 
With that contract; I don't want Finnegan anywhere near Rams Park.

On a lesser deal, I'm listening.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 3 people
CGI_Ram said:
With that contract; I don't want Finnegan anywhere near Rams Park.

On a lesser deal, I'm listening.
Click to expand...

I think its a foregone conclusion that it will be with a restructured deal. He is a prime candidate to be the guy to convert much of his $$$ to a roster bonus, freeing up valuable cap space.
 
Well I am surprised but not disappointed to see Williams coming back. I was more surprised to see him gone in 2013.
 
V3 said:
Yes and no. Remember, Walton really wasn't Fisher's first choice. The Rams wanted Ryan and they thought they had him and then he ditched them. Everyone had already been hired by that time and the Rams were left with slim pickings. They had to choose from what was left. I think a better gauge of the ability to admit mistakes will be with the players(Pead, Quick, Finnegan, etc). Quick will get more time but the other two really have no business being on the team anymore.
Click to expand...


I agree, however I was just looking singularly at the removal of Walton. The others are indeed different questions.
 
Ehhh I'm indifferent with the move, but surprised they made it this late. Usually they occur soon after the season is over.
 
CoachO said:
I don't think he was healthy at any point during the season. Even watching him in training camp, he just didn't seem to have the jump that he had the previous year. I think they kept it very quiet, knowing they had to sink or swim with him, given the overall youth and inexperience of the secondary.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see him brought back, and for him to make a statement as to the type of PRO he is and have a bounce back season. Thy guy has been a quality player for too long, to suddenly forget how to play without it being physical.
Click to expand...

Not sure why they would offer up the eye injury as an excuse later, than, if it was really something else (especially if this came out after he was on IR?). And if it WASN'T something else, than the eye injury hadn't happened yet in training camp, and if he looked like he lost his jump, that is kind of alarming, and maybe evidence that he lost it all of a sudden. He is kind of young, admittedly, but it probably does happen sometimes. He isn't the biggest player, and he built his reputation on being hardnosed, physical and relentess, and hat may have taken a cumulative toll on his body. If I thought there was a chance he was even a semblance of his former self, I'd be all for bringing him back (but only at a reduced contract, duly noted above). Fisher should be in the best possible position to make this determination, hopefully he makes the right call, and not prematurely cut him if he has something left in the tank, or mistakenly keep him on the roster out of a misplaced sense of loyalty that couds his judgement of he is in fact done.
 
FREAK YEESSSSS!!!

GREG WILLIAMS IS BACK!!!! THE PANZY ARSE D IS BEHIND US!!! WALTON STINKS!!

OMG this made my day. Our secondary was way better under Williams.
 
Glad we're getting a new DC, Walton just wasn't the guy. Hope he has more success in the future and wish him the best.
 
Ramifications said:
Not sure why they would offer up the eye injury as an excuse later, than, if it was really something else (especially if this came out after he was on IR?). And if it WASN'T something else, than the eye injury hadn't happened yet in training camp, and if he looked like he lost his jump, that is kind of alarming, and maybe evidence that he lost it all of a sudden. He is kind of young, admittedly, but it probably does happen sometimes. He isn't the biggest player, and he built his reputation on being hardnosed, physical and relentess, and hat may have taken a cumulative toll on his body. If I thought there was a chance he was even a semblance of his former self, I'd be all for bringing him back (but only at a reduced contract, duly noted above). Fisher should be in the best possible position to make this determination, hopefully he makes the right call, and not prematurely cut him if he has something left in the tank, or mistakenly keep him on the roster out of a misplaced sense of loyalty that couds his judgement of he is in fact done.
Click to expand...

The eye injury has nothing to do with what I am referring to. And they only made that public AFTER they chose to place him on IR. They went into the season severely shorthanded at the CB position. McGee was not going to play, and they knew they were forced to go with Finnegan regardless of his physical condition. Why would they make that sort of thing public?

If you listen to any of the radio "experts", they have all suggested that Finnegan was NOT healthy the entire season. He had leg issues mid through the 2012 season, and I have my doubts as to how well this previous injury actually healed heading into training camp.

While it is quite possible that they do in fact cut ties with him, that he has "hit a wall" and it better days are indeed behind him, I for one, just don't see that being the case.

He and Fisher have to much history, so, as I said before, it wont shock me for him to be brought back. Unless they bring in another veteran CB, this secondary appears to be even younger in 2014, and that just doesn't bode well moving forward. Especially with a Greg Williams aggressive approach.
 
I personally did not like the hire of Tim Walton so this doesn't bother me at all. I'm all for giving ppl another chance, but I think it might be beneficial to snag Greg Williams while we had the chance. He helped Tennessee's defense out quite a bit in his first year with the team, and I think his aggressive defense fits well with ours. Got the physical corners, got the pass rushers, hello aggressive defense! :bigup: I think the defense will be a lot of fun to watch!
 
CoachO said:
The eye injury has nothing to do with what I am referring to. And they only made that public AFTER they chose to place him on IR. They went into the season severely shorthanded at the CB position. McGee was not going to play, and they knew they were forced to go with Finnegan regardless of his physical condition. Why would they make that sort of thing public?

If you listen to any of the radio "experts", they have all suggested that Finnegan was NOT healthy the entire season. He had leg issues mid through the 2012 season, and I have my doubts as to how well this previous injury actually healed heading into training camp.

While it is quite possible that they do in fact cut ties with him, that he has "hit a wall" and it better days are indeed behind him, I for one, just don't see that being the case.

He and Fisher have to much history, so, as I said before, it wont shock me for him to be brought back. Unless they bring in another veteran CB, this secondary appears to be even younger in 2014, and that just doesn't bode well moving forward. Especially with a Greg Williams aggressive approach.
Click to expand...

I realize it wasn't what you were referring to (that would be the part about if it was really something else), but in fairness, what you referred to was pretty vague and general the first time, you mentioned the leg with the most recent response immediately above. Not mentioning it initially clearly complicated me responding with specificity to something you didn't mention inthe first place. I alluded to it possibly being addressed AFTER IR. A team might want to keep an injury to an ACTIVE player on the down low (within the limits of complying with league's injury reporting policy), OBVIOUSLY, so they aren't a featured target in opposing game plans.

How does that apply to a player on IR? Keep in mind the sequence when you ask why they would make it public. THEY DID MAKE IT PUBLIC, only after he went on IR (which as noted above, seemingly can do no harm at that point). You may ask yourself...



why they would divulge that? But the fact is, they did. My question, still unanswered, IF YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE IT PUBLIC, why mention the eye and say what it wasn't, and keep secret what it really was? Either say nothing, or say what it was, othewise it kind of defeats the purpose.

I didn't hear anything close to consensus that his issue was a lingering 2012 leg injury, there was speculation that he wasn't the same player. I get that you don't think it is the case. I didn't say he absolutely, positively, definitely has hit the wall and lost it, just suggested it as a possibility, and do find their mentioning the eye puzzling and a headscratcher (why disinformation when no longer relevant?). Needless to say, his history is meaningless if he is no longer the player he was (unless in some kind of a coach/mentor capacity?). If he is the player he was, you or Fisher won't need to invoke history, his body of work at his best speaks for itself. If he still "doesn't seem to have the jump" in 2014, two years removed from the putative 2012 leg injury, at what point, how many more years of ineffectiveness would you need, to concur that maybe he isn't the player he was? There could be timing issues regarding when would be the best time cut or restructure him, if that is the directon they choose.

To recap, if he can return to something close to form, I'm onboard. If Fisher determines he can still play, I don't want him cut (but he needs to be drastically, severely restructured due to the uncertainty of the brutal 2013 season). If in his estimation he has lost it, he needs to be gone as a player, history or not. Not sure what you could possibly debate about this last part? :^)
 
Ramifications said:
I realize it wasn't what you were referring to (that would be the part about if it was really something else), but in fairness, what you referred to was pretty vague and general the first time, you mentioned the leg with the most recent response immediately above. Not mentioning it initially clearly complicated me responding with specificity to something you didn't mention inthe first place. I alluded to it possibly being addressed AFTER IR. A team might want to keep an injury to an ACTIVE player on the down low (within the limits of complying with league's injury reporting policy), OBVIOUSLY, so they aren't a featured target in opposing game plans.

How does that apply to a player on IR? Keep in mind the sequence when you ask why they would make it public. THEY DID MAKE IT PUBLIC, only after he went on IR (which as noted above, seemingly can do no harm at that point). You may ask yourself...



why they would divulge that? But the fact is, they did. My question, still unanswered, IF YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE IT PUBLIC, why mention the eye and say what it wasn't, and keep secret what it really was? Either say nothing, or say what it was, othewise it kind of defeats the purpose.

I didn't hear anything close to consensus that his issue was a lingering 2012 leg injury, there was speculation that he wasn't the same player. I get that you don't think it is the case. I didn't say he absolutely, positively, definitely has hit the wall and lost it, just suggested it as a possibility, and do find their mentioning the eye puzzling and a headscratcher (why disinformation when no longer relevant?). Needless to say, his history is meaningless if he is no longer the player he was (unless in some kind of a coach/mentor capacity?). If he is the player he was, you or Fisher won't need to invoke history, his body of work at his best speaks for itself. If he still "doesn't seem to have the jump" in 2014, two years removed from the putative 2012 leg injury, at what point, how many more years of ineffectiveness would you need, to concur that maybe he isn't the player he was? There could be timing issues regarding when would be the best time cut or restructure him, if that is the directon they choose.

To recap, if he can return to something close to form, I'm onboard. If Fisher determines he can still play, I don't want him cut (but he needs to be drastically, severely restructured due to the uncertainty of the brutal 2013 season). If in his estimation he has lost it, he needs to be gone as a player, history or not. Not sure what you could possibly debate about this last part? :^)
Click to expand...


I am not debating that at all. IF he isn't capable of performing, no one is saying he should still be here. I have NEVER said that. The only thing I said, was it would not surprise me either way. And yes, the history will have some bearing on whether they bring him back, if even for a look at training camp.

I don't quite see what difference it makes either way, regarding making any of his injuries public or not. The eye injury was ultimately what ended his season, so they gave that as the reason. Why would they address any other previous injuries, (whether there were any or not) at that time? If they impacted his performance, and they knowingly paraded him out there (because they had no other viable option), they would only create a PR storm that just isn't necessary.

At the end of the day, the only reason I brought up Finnegan or Dunbar in this thread, is that by bringing Williams back, it could change the thought process regarding the personnel. Either way, I trust that both Fisher and Williams will do what is best for the franchise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back