View Poll Results: If Martz could have gotten along with the FO. Whos regime would you rather have?

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • Linehans regime

    31 60.78%
  • Martz regime

    20 39.22%
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 135
  1. #16
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,597
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    I believe the question was, who's regimine would you rather have, not which one is better.

    That being said and given what we've had to endure with Martz and his staff over the last couple of years, I welcome a change wholeheartedly.


  2. #17
    RamsFan16's Avatar
    RamsFan16 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Age
    24
    Posts
    5,072
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    No I didn't say he is better because we signed some D and TEs I said that he is better because he is addressing the positions that we need and are short on, I agree that it'll take a few seasons but he is atleast trying to imrpove the team and not load up on Offense like usual.
    RamsFan16

  3. #18
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,300
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFan16
    I said that he is better because he is addressing the positions that we need and are short on
    As did Martz, so I don't see your point at all.

    The implication that Martz did not try to address areas of need and instead focused on adding more offensive firepower to units that were fine is rather inaccurate, IMO.

  4. #19
    RamsFan16's Avatar
    RamsFan16 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Age
    24
    Posts
    5,072
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    As did Martz, so I don't see your point at all.

    The implication that Martz did not try to address areas of need and instead focused on adding more offensive firepower to units that were fine is rather inaccurate, IMO.
    Martz did not, ok he signed an old washed up LB in Coakley, he drafted Lewis/Pickett/Archuleta and after 4 or 5 years they were doing nothing and he went on to not address that until the '05 draft and then addressed it to an extent but didn't give the rookies playing time they should have gotten, he never addressed the DT position after we drafted pickett and lewis, he drafted manu and after a few years still proved nothing so Martz kept him adn then drafted Collins a few years ago in the what 5th? 6th? 7th Round? He never amounted to anything and didn't sign Veterans, he stuck with Martin and Chandler at Backup QB and they through INTs like no other, he kept Larry Marmie at DC just because he is a friend.

    I don't think he did, thats just my opinion. And I'm leaving it at that.
    RamsFan16

  5. #20
    rams!'s Avatar
    rams! is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    ill siDe
    Age
    26
    Posts
    72
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    The only reason I voted Martz is because we still don't know what Linehan can do.


  6. #21
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,300
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFan16
    Martz did not
    Yes he did. I don't know how you can dispute this with a straight face. Positions of need were addressed under the Martz regime. I'll specifically show you:


    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFan16
    he signed an old washed up LB in Coakley
    Funny, last year prior to the season you said you were looking forward to seeing Coakley on the field. I guess he wasn't washed up then. LOL

    The bottom line is whatever you think of Coakley now, the position was being addressed last year by Martz with that signing. In fact, he added two new starting LBs in Claiborne and Coakley for the price of one. So two positions were addressed - MLB and OLB.


    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFan16
    he never addressed the DT position after we drafted pickett and lewis
    You're right, we never spent a first round pick in 2003 on a DT. LOL

    Again, position being addressed.


    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFan16
    He never amounted to anything and didn't sign Veterans
    It cracks me up how in one breath you yell at Martz for not giving rookies the playing time they needed, only to turn around and yell at him for giving Manumaleuna too much playing time.

    Truth be told, Manu took over for Conwell in 2003, and by 2005, Martz had brought back veteran Roland Williams to replace Manu as the starting tight end.

    Not only did Martz sign a veteran, which you claim he didn't, but he only gave Manu a two year leash as the starter before seeking to address the position.


    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFan16
    he stuck with Martin and Chandler at Backup QB and they through INTs like no other
    Martz stuck with Chandler? That's not true at all. Martz benched Chandler for his poor performances, and then Chandler was cut after the season. How in the world can you claim he stuck with him?

    Furthermore, Martz has attempted to bring in younger prospects at the QB position by drafting players such as Fitzpatrick and Smoker. He also brought in our current starter, Marc Bulger, in January of 2001 after he was released by the Falcons.


    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFan16
    I don't think he did, thats just my opinion. And I'm leaving it at that.
    Well, you're welcome to your opinion, though it seems you've drawn on a number of inaccurate facts to arrive at it. So if you're content in "leaving it" as being factually wrong, that's up to you.

    The bottom line is Martz did address numerous positions of need. The only debatable part is how well those players worked out. Some did, some didn't, but you cannot dispute that he tried to address them.

    Plus, we don't know how well Linehan has addressed our needs, so we're back to square one of rambruce's point - there is no logical way you can say Linehan is better than Martz before even seeing the guys he picked up play a down.

  7. #22
    RamsFan16's Avatar
    RamsFan16 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Age
    24
    Posts
    5,072
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    I said after they attempted to address them they did no more, after they played like there "bust" selves we still did nothing about it, I said he attempted to early but after that didn't work he did nothing more.
    RamsFan16

  8. #23
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,300
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFan16
    I said after they attempted to address them they did no more, after they played like there "bust" selves we still did nothing about it, I said he attempted to early but after that didn't work he did nothing more.
    You're backpedaling pretty quickly. First your initial argument was that Martz didn't address positions of need at all. I showed that he did. Now it seems you're conceding that he did address them, but didn't readdress those positions when the original solution didn't work out.

    Again, incorrect. When London Fletcher left in 2002, they addressed the position by bringing in Jamie Duncan and Robert Thomas. When neither of them worked, they brought in Chris Claiborne to readdress the position. They drafted Kennedy two years after Pickett and Lewis were selected. They signed veteran TE Roland Williams as a starter two years to readdress the tight end position because Manu wasn't working out. When Chandler didn't work out, they cut him and added depth at QB by drafting Fitzpatrick. The offensive line was played poorly in 2004, so Martz brought in first round pick Alex Barron while also drafting Richie Incognito and Claude Terrell. I could go on.

    So I don't see any facts to support this new argument of your's, that Martz didn't readdress positions of need after the prior solution did not work out.

  9. #24
    tanus is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    535
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    You must also factor in the amount of money Linehan and Co. has had to work with this offseason compared to other offseasons under the Martz regime. The Martz regime had to deal with 2 huge contracts that resulted in dead money (Warner & Turley) for a couple of offseasons.

    That being said, I do like what Linehan and Co. have done so far, however, they do have some mighty big shoes to fill.

  10. #25
    maineram's Avatar
    maineram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Brunswick, Maine
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,112
    Rep Power
    29

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    I'd have to give this staff an, "incompete" so far. Three minicamps gives the players only ideas of what is to come. For us fans also.

    Maineram -
    and out of the ashes rise ...The Breakfast Club !

  11. #26
    BIG-BLUE's Avatar
    BIG-BLUE is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Roseville,CA USA
    Age
    53
    Posts
    655
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater
    I believe the question was, who's regimine would you rather have, not which one is better.

    That being said and given what we've had to endure with Martz and his staff over the last couple of years, I welcome a change wholeheartedly.

    That was the question, & i too would rather have Linehan & co. over our old staff. Martz made a vitial mistake bringing in Marmie. Which led us to the bottom of every defensive stat. Change had to happen & i welcome it big time

    Bottom line defense wins champinships, & that was never going to happen under Martz. I look forward to what will be brought in with the new staff & welcome them whole heartedly. & yes even before they have played a game. Keep in mind i'm not sayin Linehan is better (time will tell) just sayin changes had to be made.

  12. #27
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Here
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,406
    Rep Power
    50

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    Quote Originally Posted by RamsFan16
    No I didn't say he is better because we signed some D and TEs I said that he is better because he is addressing the positions that we need and are short on, I agree that it'll take a few seasons but he is atleast trying to imrpove the team and not load up on Offense like usual.
    Well D and TE are positions that we need so let's not mince words. You prefer him and or think he's better because he addressed some needs.

    The point is you have NO idea how good or bad we will be on D, or how well the Rams will do at all, because you haven't seen 1 single play yet. So just because you see some names on paper like Witherspoon etc that doesn't translate into wins. If the Rams go 4-12 this year (god forbid) and the new players signed don't work out, the new scheme doesn't work out, or the new coaching style doesn't work out, you will be complaining about the Linehan regime. Don't get overexcited about Linehan and company when you haven't seen anything yet.

    Like I said I think it looks good on paper, but it's only paper so far.
    BRUUUUUUUUCE


  13. #28
    STLRAMSFAN Guest

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater
    I believe the question was, who's regimine would you rather have, not which one is better.

    That being said and given what we've had to endure with Martz and his staff over the last couple of years, I welcome a change wholeheartedly.
    Quote Originally Posted by BIG-BLUE
    That was the question, & i too would rather have Linehan & co. over our old staff. Martz made a vitial mistake bringing in Marmie. Which led us to the bottom of every defensive stat. Change had to happen & i welcome it big time

    Bottom line defense wins champinships, & that was never going to happen under Martz. I look forward to what will be brought in with the new staff & welcome them whole heartedly. & yes even before they have played a game. Keep in mind i'm not sayin Linehan is better (time will tell) just sayin changes had to be made.
    I agree this is what the post was about guys. Thank you for understanding. I never said which coach was better. I just said if Martz did not have FO problems would you feel more comfortable with Martz or Linehans regime going into the season and for me its still Linehan all the way.

  14. #29
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,300
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    Quote Originally Posted by STLRAMSFAN
    I just said if Martz did not have FO problems would you feel more comfortable with Martz or Linehans regime going into the season
    So essentially, the question is whether or not you wanted a change in coaches going into 2006, which is a question that has been beaten to death for months now. Nice try disguising it. LOL

  15. #30
    RamsFan16's Avatar
    RamsFan16 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Age
    24
    Posts
    5,072
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Linehan vs Martz Regime

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    So essentially, the question is whether or not you wanted a change in coaches going into 2006, which is a question that has been beaten to death for months now. Nice try disguising it. LOL
    C'mon he was just asking a question. He had an original question and thats what he asked.

    Don't hate on him like you do me.
    RamsFan16

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •