You go through a lot in a short post...so will try to cover it all.
Why is it most reporters have nothing good to say about the rams? every article I look at has reporters or "analyst" doubting our team and predicting failure. Did this start because we have been horrible for a decade? maybe the move to LA?"
The move to LA increased coverage that is for sure, but I don't think it made it more negative....it has been negative for a while. You move to a larger market you get more coverage. It seems more negative but that is due to volume not percentage. Any team that hasn't won in 10+ years and has a coach that hasn't won since 2008 doesn't get much benefit of the doubt....on much of anything.
Is the defense still strong? ITS BEEN UPGRADED
I get that positive thinking Rams fans think this, but there area TON of question marks. Multiple guys coming back from injury that you are hoping will do equal or better than the past. Take Ogletree for example, not only are you counting on him coming back fully and quickly, but you are taking a guy that was considered average/above average and moving him to one of the most important positions on the field. I get he replaced an aging veteran but it is still a lot to pile on a guy. Easily 1/3 or more of the D has questions of some sort - health, development, adjustment.
They traded too many picks for Goff! WE WERE ON THE OTHER END OF RG3 TRADE AND PICKED UP ALOT OF PICKS.
Not really sure what you are saying here. Is it that the Rams had plenty of picks before they could lose some? The fact the Rams had made major trades before so this one is fine? Not really clear. The best I can say is there are some that believe that you should never make major trades for a high first rounder, that even if the player turns out fine it is still a total negative. Many on here thought that the Rams had fleeced the Skins after the first year when he got them to the playoffs for instance (when the trade looked like the Skins had got something of value).
Goff will fail ! HE HAS NOT PLAYED IN PADS YET !
I haven't seen anyone say he would fail. I have heard 1) that he is a rookie and will take time to develop and thus he will not help this year - pretty standard stuff for a rookie QB. I have also heard 2) that his ceiling isn't that high and the Rams traded for a guy that will average to above average in his career - this is a long way off from a bust though. 3) the Rams don't have the tools around him yet to help him succeed - tough to argue this one as the talk is that he will improve the WR output, not that the WR will help him and that he will grow with the young WR and TEs....well that means everyone is growing (everyone needs time).
They shouldn't of moved to LA ! WHO WOULD SAY NO TO LA??
Where in the press did you hear this, lol?!? Their were some moral/financial issues about the move but I don't remember anyone saying that it was a negative for the on the field product. The only thing I can think of is that maybe they mean the actual move itself which is a legit concern. That isn't a long term thing about LA, but the logical concern that a relocation is a distraction to all involved. Every player, coach, and employee has to move (At least partially - even if they had a place in LA they had stuff in STL that needs moving). They are going to have to deal with a new city, a new set of press, and a new set of off the field distractions. Yes players and coaches move, get traded, etc. but this isn't a couple of guys this is EVERYONE. Add in the new facilities are temporary and that is also adds some confusion....
