I disagree that Foles isn't to blame. It's one thing if he were hitting receivers and they were dropping the ball all the time. He was misfiring horrible consistently. He was missing reads. He had 2 nice games and the rest were mediocre at best.
Where I was wrong
- Thread starter RamzFanz
- 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.
shaunpinney
Hall of Fame
I was totally mistaken this year, I thought the "We're a run first team" was a little bit of smoke and mirrors and we were going to hit the season with a surprising air-attack - I knew Foles wasn't Payton Manning or ARod, but I thought he was going to be a decent starter caliber QB - I was wrong, on both accounts. Our passing game has been embarrassing to watch and Foles has been a very disappointing - he's been poor backup quality. I couldn't have been more wrong - ohh well don't you just love being Rams fan!
RaminExile
Hall of Fame
Quick was playing like a Young rising star before he got hurt. That injury was one of the worst you'll ever see. He's just not been able to come back from it. Maybe he needs to be another year removed from the surgery and rehab or maybe it's just killed his motivation. I don't know. Would like to hear Snead and Fisher address it with their real honest thoughts on his development but they won't.
Other than that I agree they vastly overestimated the level of our wideouts. Remember at training camp when Cole Beasley was tearing our dbacks apart. We just couldn't cover him. Austin can't run routes like that. Britts inadequacies were hidden by substandard qbs from Clemens to Davis to Hill so they thought fixing that position would fix them. That's on the coaching staff.
Also no one thought Foles could be so bad (except for Chip Kelly?). Or did Clay Matthews pulverize his career with that spear to the solar plexus?
Other than that I agree they vastly overestimated the level of our wideouts. Remember at training camp when Cole Beasley was tearing our dbacks apart. We just couldn't cover him. Austin can't run routes like that. Britts inadequacies were hidden by substandard qbs from Clemens to Davis to Hill so they thought fixing that position would fix them. That's on the coaching staff.
Also no one thought Foles could be so bad (except for Chip Kelly?). Or did Clay Matthews pulverize his career with that spear to the solar plexus?
Dieter the Brock
Fourth responder
I really thought Foles was going to great things. After the Seattle game, I was stoked.
I cant honestly say I have ever seen a QB unravel like this cat. He is just terrible and like others have said, its not mechanical.
He is just late on all his throws. I dont know how its possible to correct that
I am beyond shocked at how poorly he has played.
I cant honestly say I have ever seen a QB unravel like this cat. He is just terrible and like others have said, its not mechanical.
He is just late on all his throws. I dont know how its possible to correct that
I am beyond shocked at how poorly he has played.
Zombie Slayer
You are entitled to nothing.
I really thought Quick was going to come back from injury this year and play at the very least to the level he was last season before injury. Possibly even show us that he can be our #1. Not only has he not done that at all but he's been a complete nonfactor this whole season. Marquez has more catches than him.
No doubt Foles is not the answer. No doubt he's horrible. But there's plenty of blame to go around. His receivers are just as bad. His line is too. Just a bad offense all around. If they can't get Gurley untracked its a single digit scoring game every time.
I thought they would be much more healthy. I was skeptical of Saffold but the rest of the Oline I thought would have plenty of youth to be there 90% of the time, gel as a unit and get markedly better over the season.
Yeah looking at his game logs he had 3 solid games, one big play against Dallas and was pretty mediocre the rest of the way. He never topped 100 yards in a game. Maybe if he wouldn't have got hurt he would have reverted to form. Maybe his injury killed his momentum. Who knows.
fearsomefour
Legend
I expected Foles to be solid even given the holes in his game.
I see no reason to keep Britt on for $4M a year....he just is not that productive and drops passes and is always nicked up.
I thought the Rams would be 8-8 this year given the youth of the O line....looking at probably 7-9 this year....that is the Fisher water line it seems.
What I underestimated was the Rams depth on the D line.
I see no reason to keep Britt on for $4M a year....he just is not that productive and drops passes and is always nicked up.
I thought the Rams would be 8-8 this year given the youth of the O line....looking at probably 7-9 this year....that is the Fisher water line it seems.
What I underestimated was the Rams depth on the D line.
Yeah I dont look at Quick with the same reverance I have towards Danario Alexander. Now THAT guy was derailed by injury. I'll always wonder "what if" when his name pops up.
And of course he didnt cost us a flippin 2nd round pick...
I thought we could win despite Jeff Fisher's mundane philosophy. I assumed our players would overcome the boring playbook and play/execute above Fishers mediocre expectations.
Sadly, I was very wrong.
Sadly, I was very wrong.
I don't think we have a stud at WR or on the line... and if you need an example of that, consider the drop off from Gurley to Mason to Cunningham....
Playmaker/beast to serviceable to back up.. no one on the line or at WR fits that playmaker mold not named Tavon Austin, but he's not a traditional WR so i'm not sure how to truly include him.. he's not a julio, antonio brown, etc.
Hell, I'll take it a step further and use Aaron Donald's impact vs Langford... i don't think anyone would consider Langford a backup type of player, but he certainly isn't the special type that AD is
Playmaker/beast to serviceable to back up.. no one on the line or at WR fits that playmaker mold not named Tavon Austin, but he's not a traditional WR so i'm not sure how to truly include him.. he's not a julio, antonio brown, etc.
Hell, I'll take it a step further and use Aaron Donald's impact vs Langford... i don't think anyone would consider Langford a backup type of player, but he certainly isn't the special type that AD is
This is why I mentioned before that the Rams should trade Tavon. Use him as part of a move up to get Goff, because his value on the market will be much greater than what he adds to the Rams during the season.
Of course you guys lit me up pretty good for saying it, and I expected that. But I still think the best use of Tavon is in trade UNLESS they get an OC in here that can run a wide open offense that stretches defenses horizontally and vertically. Which of course won't happen with Fish in charge. So just put the guy to good use as part of a move up for a guy who will set this team up for the long haul at QB.
Of course you guys lit me up pretty good for saying it, and I expected that. But I still think the best use of Tavon is in trade UNLESS they get an OC in here that can run a wide open offense that stretches defenses horizontally and vertically. Which of course won't happen with Fish in charge. So just put the guy to good use as part of a move up for a guy who will set this team up for the long haul at QB.
Danario was a legitimate number 1. What he was doing in the NFL was basically on one leg. Just imagine if he were fully healthy.
Quick wasn't just a second round pick. He was the 33rd overall pick. That was a botched selection.
If the Rams cut Foles here's a prediction for you guys: he will sign with the Chiefs and backup the position for Andy Reid and at some point will demonstrate he's not done in this league.
QBs are funny, in that they are very dependent on the order of reads, how good the protections are, and how well their coordinator projects what the defense will bring along with his responses to that. If all those things aren't there it is possible to not get a good read on the QB. With Foles in particular we know he's not an elite QB, but he's also not garbage. He is better than he looked in this offense IMO and will prove that at some point and probably with another team.
QBs are funny, in that they are very dependent on the order of reads, how good the protections are, and how well their coordinator projects what the defense will bring along with his responses to that. If all those things aren't there it is possible to not get a good read on the QB. With Foles in particular we know he's not an elite QB, but he's also not garbage. He is better than he looked in this offense IMO and will prove that at some point and probably with another team.
