Does anyone still believe we are a playoff team?

[adarian_too]

You are right. He was successful. And just like players, when they stop performing at the level we are used to seeing them at, it is time for them to go.

Touche, he said.

[HUbison]

You are right. He was successful. And just like players, when they stop performing at the level we are used to seeing them at, it is time for them to go.

At what exactly makes his success past tense, because the Rams have lost two weeks in a row? Is that the definition? It must be because before the past two weeks, we were 4-2 and I don't think anyone would call that unsuccessful. So knowing that some are defining unsuccessful as a two week skid makes me wonder why more head coaches aren't launched away more often. I mean there are teams all over the league that can find a two game losing streak somewhere on their schedule. The fact is we can't exactly write off Martz as "unsuccessful" because we've lost two in a row.

If we must pin our current skid on the shoulders of coaches, wouldn't it make more sense that our temporary demise is due to the infusion of a coach who has NEVER had success as anything other than a DB coach (Marmie) or a coach who has had success at every level he's worked (Martz)?

[AvengerRam]

His high winning percentage is more a testament to Vermeil and Warner and some of the other quality veterans that have since departed.

Actually, since the Rams started 0-5 in 2002, and Bulger took over as the starting QB (with the exception of the first game of 2003), Martz has a record of 23-13. That's not too shabby.

My opinion remains - Martz will soon be fired for being an inconsistent LOSER.

Wouldn't an "inconsistent loser" be defined as one who loses on an inconsistent basis or, stated another way, wins on a consistent basis?

Either way, Martz won't be fired any time soon.

[adarian_too]

what exactly makes his success past tense?

The fact that over 4 years has elapsed since his last SB victory and he has yet to duplicate it?

[RamsFanSam]

I think when Martz finally gets hacked off enough at the lack of fire and production, he'll come out of his fog, and we'll see a change or two. He just has to get mad, like he did when his decision not to utilize the run came under fire. He seems to do better when he's angry.

[sbramfan]

It is safe to say that this is a .500 team. I wish the defense and the special teams were the only concern, but Martz and the offence are barely squeeking out 14 points a game. Which receiver was it from New England playing corner? Troy Brown I think?

This offense has fallen way off the map, and Martz too. They should have been passing like crazy against the Pats who were way thin at CB, and yet all of a sudden Martz has become ground Chuck. Announcers who don't even watch the Rams think that Martz is losing because he is "putting his QB at risk and passing all the time." I'm not sure which games they're watching, because it seems like 1st down has become a running play for the Rams, partly why they face so many 3rd downs this year.

As for the fake Time Out play, I would sum it up this way - That was OUR coach's game planning given 2 weeks to prepare for the world champion New England Patriots. Is there really any question that we were out-coached by 1000 miles?

For those of you who were sick of the Warner/Bulger debates all year, well I think we're officially past all that. There is no question that Bulger has played well, and that even if KW were still playing for the Rams, and playing well, these other factors would shoot this team in the foot.

ON THE BRIGHT SIDE, There is a future with Bulger, Jackson, Holt, MacDonald, Curtis, Hargrove, Archuleta, Tinoisamoa, and a few others.

But not sure we can fill the other gaps by next year to get back to form?

[thoey]

At what exactly makes his success past tense, because the Rams have lost two weeks in a row? Is that the definition? It must be because before the past two weeks, we were 4-2 and I don't think anyone would call that unsuccessful. So knowing that some are defining unsuccessful as a two week skid makes me wonder why more head coaches aren't launched away more often. I mean there are teams all over the league that can find a two game losing streak somewhere on their schedule. The fact is we can't exactly write off Martz as "unsuccessful" because we've lost two in a row.

If we must pin our current skid on the shoulders of coaches, wouldn't it make more sense that our temporary demise is due to the infusion of a coach who has NEVER had success as anything other than a DB coach (Marmie) or a coach who has had success at every level he's worked (Martz)?

We can say that a coach's responsibilities are to build a quality coaching staff, provide input to draft quality players, and to provide motivation, training and game plans to beat weekly opponents. All the above with one goal in mind, to win games.

Well, we could say that under Martz' leadership, the Rams are 5 and 9 during their last fourteen games, including the last two games of last season, this pre-season, and the games played so far this year. If you take out the pre-season games (because they don't count?), we are still 4 and 6 over that same period. A 35-40% record over that period isn't a winning record.

Yes, Marmie gets some credit. But so does Martz for bringing him in. This team is ill equipped/staffed. It is badly prepared. It is not motivated. They drank the koolaid earlier, realized that it doesn't work, and have now given up. The only reason they have four wins is the players own pride.

So, Martz has a recent losing record, and the team doesn't appear to be behind him. As I have been told, the NFL stands for Not For Long. Time to let him go.

BTW, all the above is just my opinion. I have no facts besides the win-loss record from NFL.com for that opinion. Just how I feel. But I will also add that some of this is said in sarcasm. Just using the same arguments I heard last year.

[HUbison]

The fact that over 4 years has elapsed since his last SB victory and he has yet to duplicate it?

Surely, there are coaches other than Brian Billick, Jon Gruden, & Bill Bellichek (the only HCs to win a SB in the past 4 seasons) that can be considered successful coaches.

[HUbison]

We can say that a coach's responsibilities are to build a quality coaching staff, provide input to draft quality players, and to provide motivation, training and game plans to beat weekly opponents. All the above with one goal in mind, to win games.

Well, we could say that under Martz' leadership, the Rams are 5 and 9 during their last fourteen games, including the last two games of last season, this pre-season, and the games played so far this year. If you take out the pre-season games (because they don't count?), we are still 4 and 6 over that same period. A 35-40% record over that period isn't a winning record.

Yes, Marmie gets some credit. But so does Martz for bringing him in. This team is ill equipped/staffed. It is badly prepared. It is not motivated. They drank the koolaid earlier, realized that it doesn't work, and have now given up. The only reason they have four wins is the players own pride.

So, Martz has a recent losing record, and the team doesn't appear to be behind him. As I have been told, the NFL stands for Not For Long. Time to let him go.

BTW, all the above is just my opinion. I have no facts besides the win-loss record from NFL.com for that opinion. Just how I feel. But I will also add that some of this is said in sarcasm. Just using the same arguments I heard last year.

Martz does some frustrating things, no question. And I respect your opinion, Thoey. For me, I just don't see how getting rid of Martz is going to solve our problems. Get rid of Marmie, revamp the secondary, rebuild the O-line, but tossing Martz will hamper the improvement of this team.

[adarian_too]

ON THE BRIGHT SIDE, There is a future with Bulger, Jackson, Holt, MacDonald, Curtis, Hargrove, Archuleta, Tinoisamoa, and a few others.

Another thread suggested that the D should stay intact. Others say CB or MLB or S or RT replacements should take priority. I think the real question is what personnel should stay because, regardless of system, they will succeed because they have come to play football. Each day. Every day. Even on days when the HC thinks it could be more productively spent going to Disney World instead of refining execution.

I want to know who wants to still play football? Put up or shut time. You can't be wondering each week which team will show up. Missouri is the "Show Me" state so it really is long past due for the Rams to Show Me what they are made of. For a start, instead of yelling at the media, sMartz could show me how he yelled at the OL/ST/D coaches for embarassing him so bad after he gave them a chance to represent.

[RAMMAN68]

Only if we win this week without any struggles. Otherwise, it will be a short season.

[adarian_too]

Surely, there are coaches other than Brian Billick, Jon Gruden, & Bill Bellichek (the only HCs to win a SB in the past 4 seasons) that can be considered successful coaches.

Now that is the question isn't it? How do we measure success? Are we to be satisfied with one playoff game every year? Two games every three years? 1 SB win every 5? If you win 1 SB you get 8 years to win the next? Is it OK just to win a division title? Or do you need to win at least one playoff game when you win the title also? Just what is success that we can live with? They say nobody remembers who came in 2nd. Would I say that winning a SB is the only measure of success? No. But it is one measure and in that sense sMartz's success is in the past tense.

[rebel13]

Rebel, MARTZ DID NOT INHERIT ANYTHING HE DIDN'T HELP CREATE. Who do you think is responsible for Marshall Faulk? Who was a rookie WR (trick question here) when Martz was a coach? Who installed the offense that you probably went bonkers over when the Rams were known as GSOT? MARTZ. Not Vermeil. Look up Vermeil's record pre-Martz and then let me know what you think.

KURT WARNER is responsible for Marshall Faulk! What has he done without Kurt? Before or after?? Look at Tiki and how he has blossome with Kurt!!

Where has this "vaunted" offense gone? Is Bulger incapable of running it? Or has Martz died on the vine? Yes he was the coach, but Vermeil drafted Holt, didn't he?

My problem with Martz is that this team is sliding down. A good coach will make his team better not allow them to get worse. Each week they look more disorganized, less fire and less enthusiasm and less capable. Each week the game management get's worse. I have seen this team get worse for the last few years. Sad! I blame Martz!
And look at Vermeil's Cheifs now, they have the best offense in the league. Maybe more credit should go to Vermeil and less to Martz for the wild offense of '99.

[HUbison]

Now that is the question isn't it? How do we measure success? Are we to be satisfied with one playoff game every year? Two games every three years? 1 SB win every 5? If you win 1 SB you get 8 years to win the next? Is it OK just to win a division title? Or do you need to win at least one playoff game when you win the title also? Just what is success that we can live with? They say nobody remembers who came in 2nd. Would I say that winning a SB is the only measure of success? No. But it is one measure and in that sense sMartz's success is in the past tense.

Normally, this question doesn't come up until the offseason, but now is as good a time as any...what defines success. Adarian, as you have stated, some will count only our SB wins as an adequate quantification of success. And that is indeed one way to mark success. As for me, I'm more comparative. In particular I look at the 90's. I don't think anyone could count the 90's as a success, regardless of the measure. However, in '99 everything changed. No longer were we considered the worst team in the NFL. In fact, we were world champions. However, even if we hadn't beat Tennessee, or Tampa, I still would have seen making the playoffs as a successful season. So in my opinion, 3 of the last 4 seasons were successful. That is why I say Martz has been and continues to be successful.

But I guess everyone has to answer from their own viewpoint, what is success?

[AvengerRam]

KURT WARNER is responsible for Marshall Faulk! What has he done without Kurt? Before or after?? Look at Tiki and how he has blossome with Kurt!!

Geez! Not this nonsense again!

You mean like when Marshall Faulk had 2,227 yards from scrimmage in 1998 when playing for the Colts? I wasn't aware Kurt Warner was the QB there that year.