The bottom line on Fisher

[rampete]

...No one seems to want to criticize haslett despite how lousy our defense has been. Who did you think is coaching fisher to play as far off the ball as he does? Do you guys think that fisher is doing that on his own?...

l

GC, seriously, are you trying to say that you think haslett is asking our players to play off his man until the ball is caught? one would like to think that once the ball is in the air, the defender will close the gap and make a play on the ball or at the least provide some distraction to the receiver in his route...to play with a pre-snap cushion is an everyday reality; even the elite DBs do it in every game...but i'd like to think that the coaches tell our defenders to close the gap once the receiver has progressed in their routes to a certain point...

[Goldenfleece]

I really hope you're not trying to suggest that Fisher's inability to break free from a block is as egregious a mistake as an unblocked defender completely missing an open field tackle to prevent a huge gain or score.

Was Fakhir Brown actually an unblocked defender? My impression was that the receiver lined up opposite the corner was pretty much always assigned to block him. I know the safeties often go unblocked, but I'd be surprised if they called a play to the outside without assigning someone to the corner on that side of the field. The way I'm seeing it, if two players are both blocked by the opposing receiver on different plays and both plays give up big gains, but one of the players got off the block and whiffed while the other never got off the block at all...how is the former worse than the latter? Neither of them was able to make a play. Just my take. Honestly, how the corners play the run isn't really my biggest concern.

Gentlemen and Ladies, our pass rush stinks. If we had a better corner than fisher, he would be on the field. None of us know more than the coaches. No one seems to want to criticize haslett despite how lousy our defense has been. Who did you think is coaching fisher to play as far off the ball as he does? Do you guys think that fisher is doing that on his own?

Sometimes I wonder if it isn't because of a nagging injury. I don't think the coaches are telling him to play that far off; it doesn't make sense to give a guy that kind of a cushion unless you're playing a prevent defense. In Linehan's Wednesday quotes, he commented that Fisher had been playing better prior to the groin thing:

(On CB Travis Fisher’s productivity this season) “It’s like any other player. Because you’ve asked about him, it’s hard to single out players individually at this point. We are deep enough into the season where we’ve had some good days and not so good days. One of the things I think in recent weeks that probably hampered him in playing as consistent as he played earlier in the year was that he wasn’t healthy and did try to play through that groin injury he had. Actually, before he came out against Green Bay, he had played pretty well up until that point. Anytime you don’t win a football game or you get beat on a long pass, that’s the last thing that sticks in your mind. Even last week I think other than them completing a corner route on him in the two minute drill before half, he was actually pretty solid in that game. He hasn’t done anything to disappoint us at all this season.”

If he is still hurting, that would explain a lot in terms of why we see him lagging behind the receiver now and then and never see him jump up to get a swing at the ball. I also do think it is noteworthy that the reporters would ask about Fisher rather than any of the others who gave up bigger plays. I still don't think he's playing that well, but I would have thought that after such an awful day against the run, that would have been first up on the docket. So maybe he is getting an unfair share of the blame.

The last thing I would add as a possible explanation for why he's getting so much criticism is because this is one of the few positions on the defense where people actually feel like there is a choice. We can wail all day long about the pass rush, but we don't really have any backups that stick out as feasible alternatives. Likewise, there are no obvious candidates we could substitute in to improve the run defense. In the secondary, we do have Hill, Butler, or even Bartell should we want to make a change, and in years past Butler seemed the better corner. I'm not going to call for Butler to go in, but I think that's part of why Fisher is surrounded by more controversy than the others.

[Nick]

GC, seriously, are you trying to say that you think haslett is asking our players to play off his man until the ball is caught?

I think if it was such an egregious error on Fisher's part, Haslett would likely not be starting him week in and week out. If it is an error of that magnitude and Fisher continues to start, that sends a clear picture about the rest of our secondary.

The fact of the matter is Fisher isn't always giving that much cushion. He does sometimes, he doesn't on others. For instance, on the three consecutive passes thrown at him in the late second quarter, on the latter two he had tight coverage on both receivers.

Was Fakhir Brown actually an unblocked defender?

The receiver lining up across from him cut inside to block a safety, leaving Brown 100% unblocked on the play. I can take a screenshot if you want.

If he is still hurting, that would explain a lot in terms of why we see him lagging behind the receiver now and then and never see him jump up to get a swing at the ball.

Agreed, it's a fair point. And if he can't seem to stay healthy, then he's not going to get resigned. You can't afford to spend money on guys if they can't stay healthy.

I also do think it is noteworthy that the reporters would ask about Fisher rather than any of the others who gave up bigger plays.

Okay, so do you then think it's noteworthy that Linehan made a point to say he had been playing pretty well, said he had a solid game against the Chargers, and that Fisher "hasn’t done anything to disappoint us at all this season?"

This about a player that fans are calling a liability on a weekly basis. Interesting, IMO.

[RAMMAN68]

I don't get why Rams fans can't stand this guy, but the bottom line is this -- he's average. He's not nearly as bad as his detractors make him out to be, but at his best he's just decent. He doesn't get burned consistently for fifty yard pass plays, but you can almost always count on the opposing team throwing at him when they need seven yards for the first down.

So, yeah, we need to improve at that position. But, no, he isn't anywhere close to being the player some folks accuse him of being.

P.S. -- he'd look a lot better if we had any kind of pass rush.

He dose get beat for long plays, the sad part is that he is there, with the receiver, he just doesn't make a play on the ball.

[RamOfDenmark]

So now it's about whether or not they would have started a thread about him? Look, I already showed a thread with posts prior to the start of this thread that show multiple people jumping on Fisher because of his play.

Ok, I went back and checked the link in your last post and you're right there's about 3-4 people bringing up Fisher's play as one reason our defense is not doing well. The thread I was talking about in my last post though was the longer one from maybe a week ago or so, in which you among other things analyzed some specific plays by Fisher, so with regard to which prior threads we were talking about I think we've misunderstood each other. Still when I go back and read the 3 or 4 short posts in the other thread that criticise Fisher they seemed reasonable to me, no one is blaming Fisher for the loss, his play is brought up as one reason our defense isn't doing well, which I agree with, and other people bring up other reasons.

The other points that I made still sit on the table. I don't think anyone is giving everyone else on the defense a pass, but you're fighting a losing battle if you're trying to convince me any of them received the same amount of criticism Fisher has for this game.

I can agree with this, Fisher has received much more criticism than anyone else on the defense, also relatively according to their level of play. But I think it's natural to scrutinize his play more and here's why: 1) I see Fisher as the weakest link on defense, not the only weak link, but the weakest 2) we have a few other options at CB (Butler, Hill, maybe even Bartell etc.). So essentially I think it's natural to focus more of your attention on what you perceive to be the weakest link, your top priority, and then afterwards look at what else there is. And when at the same time that position is actually one of the few positions where you have other options that only makes it more logical to give Fisher a long hard look to see if he's really good enough. We could criticise Witherspoon or Little (or several other players) all day, but in the end we all know that we have no other credible options at their positions so it's less productive to do so. Doesn't it seem more productive to you to criticise a player when we have other options at his position so it's actually something we might be able to improve on?

Okay, so do you then think it's noteworthy that Linehan made a point to say he had been playing pretty well, said he had a solid game against the Chargers, and that Fisher "hasn’t done anything to disappoint us at all this season?"

This about a player that fans are calling a liability on a weekly basis. Interesting, IMO.

Ok, I have to jump at this one. When was the last time you saw a head coach call out a player in the media saying "yeah he sucked yesterday"? Linehan saying Fisher "hasn’t done anything to disappoint us at all this season?" sounds like something he would say pretty much no matter who you asked about. That's ok though, I can understand why coaches want to generally keep the criticism in-house instead of airing the dirty laundry out in the open. I'm not saying Linehan secretly thinks Fisher is awful, I'm just saying whatever he thinks you won't hear him tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth to the press when they ask. During film study etc. the coaches will let the players know who messed up and who didn't, generally you won't hear it in the press. So essentially a quote like that, I put almost zero weight on it, either way, which is one reason reading quotes from players/coaches isn't that interesting to begin with. They generally all know what they're supposed to say to avoid controversy and that's what they say. That they let Fisher play every week is a stronger signal, either that they think he's alright, or at least that they think he's beating out the rest of the contenders, if I were you I'd lean more towards that argument. I still think they're making a mistake with Butler though, but I'm sure everyone here knows that by now

[Nick]

He dose get beat for long plays

When? I don't think he's given up a deep reception all year, and has only been the defender in coverage for one touchdown. You'd think with the intensity that is present in such criticism of Fisher, he was giving up a TD every game.

Still when I go back and read the 3 or 4 short posts in the other thread that criticise Fisher they seemed reasonable to me

I still don't think you are getting my point. This isn't about criticizing Fisher when he's made mistakes. If Fisher screws up, by all means call him on it. I do. I've said numerous times that his coverage on the first of three consecutive receptions was bad.

The point is the double standard that exists whenever other players who make even costlier mistakes aren't singled out either. If posters are going to take the time to single specific players out for things such as missed tackles or poor coverage, don't just single out the ones wearing #22. I really don't think that's asking very much.

Doesn't it seem more productive to you to criticise a player when we have other options at his position so it's actually something we might be able to improve on?

Since none of us are on the coaching staff and thus don't make personnel decisions for this team, I don't see why any of it is truly productive. You make it sound as if our criticisms will inspire a change. Let's step back into reality here - we're on an internet message board.

Furthermore, I don't care about depth. I'm not going to give someone a pass in the recognition department simply because he doesn't have a body behind him on the depth chart. When a guy messes up, he messes up. If you're a person who likes to single out players when that happens, do it to everyone. There's no viable excuse not to. I don't care if they're good or if they have people behind them or if they're making loads of money or no money at all. None of it makes anyone above criticism, IMO.

That they let Fisher play every week is a stronger signal, either that they think he's alright, or at least that they think he's beating out the rest of the contenders, if I were you I'd lean more towards that argument.

...which I did in my last post: "I think if it was such an egregious error on Fisher's part, Haslett would likely not be starting him week in and week out. If it is an error of that magnitude and Fisher continues to start, that sends a clear picture about the rest of our secondary."

I'm simply saying that if you're going to give legitimacy to a question asked in a press conference as some kind of signal or sign about a guy's play, you also have to give some legitimacy to the answer that's given. I didn't expect Linehan to come out and trash Fisher, but no one had a gun to his head forcing him to be that complimentary either.

[general counsel]

My point is exactly what nick said, when he quoted me. If fisher was screwing up so badly in terms of how far off he was playing, haslett would yank him out. In short, if you dont listen to the coaches, they pull you. There may well be a physical reason why he is playing further off than usual, but it comes back to my same point, which is that if haslett thought we had anyone better, that person would be on the field.

Again, i am not suggesting fisher is anything better than average, only making the point that i dont see how anyone can suggest we have anyone better, and if we do, the blame should fall on haslett for not putting that guy on the field.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

[jkramsfan]

My point is exactly what nick said, when he quoted me. If fisher was screwing up so badly in terms of how far off he was playing, haslett would yank him out. In short, if you dont listen to the coaches, they pull you. There may well be a physical reason why he is playing further off than usual, but it comes back to my same point, which is that if haslett thought we had anyone better, that person would be on the field.

Again, i am not suggesting fisher is anything better than average, only making the point that i dont see how anyone can suggest we have anyone better, and if we do, the blame should fall on haslett for not putting that guy on the field.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

everyone is making valid points and everyone has a right to there opinion,Nick has put in countless hours debating this with everyone who posts their opinions and i did take part in it last week and i am not a big fan of travis fisher, (please some other team sign him next season)but enough already,lets give it a rest,as GC says a bigger problem is our lack of a pass rush.