Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19
  1. #1
    Falconator Guest

    Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    this is hysterical.............

    Jim Haslett, what happened to "we want to run the ball, and stop the run" philosophy?......

    Just another example of why Jim Haslett should not be the Rams next head coach.......Rams need to go in a new direction - not return to the past.

    Passing 60% of the time is not a formula for a team to be successful most of the time........

    This is a desperation move by Haslett to try and get the Rams job - just another example of why Jim Haslett should not be head coach of the Rams..


  2. #2
    NJ Ramsfan1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,192
    Rep Power
    69

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    A sound coaching philosophy balances the run with the pass. Too much empahsis on one over the other usually ends up in disappointment and teams that are one dimensional will only go so far. The pass happy Rams nonetheless had Marshall Faulk, who allowed Kurt Warner and the receivers to work their magic. When idiot Martz tried to outcoach himself and only ran Marshall 14 times in SuperBowl XXXVI, we got beat. Warner put up great yardage numbers, but they meant nothing- we lost.

    While passing teams are exciting to watch, RUNNING the ball is essential to clock management and wearing down your opponent. A successful passing game opens up the offense, but the running game opens up the passing game.

    I am not in favor of bringing Martz back here. People tend to have short memories- Martz gave us just as many headaches and stupid decisions as he did excitement during his tenure here. I appreciate his contributions to our SuperBowl title team and successful teams in the early 00's, but also remember the SB we lost, the Carolina disaster in the playoffs and at least a half dozen other games where his carelessness and foolhardy approach cost us ball games. On top of that, he's a high maintenance pain in the ass- not what we need for a franchise looking for stability and sound judgment from its front office employees and coaches.

  3. #3
    Ramblin` Ram's Avatar
    Ramblin` Ram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Nation of Rams
    Age
    38
    Posts
    2,401
    Rep Power
    54

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    A sound coaching philosophy balances the run with the pass. Too much empahsis on one over the other usually ends up in disappointment and teams that are one dimensional will only go so far. The pass happy Rams nonetheless had Marshall Faulk, who allowed Kurt Warner and the receivers to work their magic. When idiot Martz tried to outcoach himself and only ran Marshall 14 times in SuperBowl XXXVI, we got beat. Warner put up great yardage numbers, but they meant nothing- we lost.

    While passing teams are exciting to watch, RUNNING the ball is essential to clock management and wearing down your opponent. A successful passing game opens up the offense, but the running game opens up the passing game.

    I am not in favor of bringing Martz back here. People tend to have short memories- Martz gave us just as many headaches and stupid decisions as he did excitement during his tenure here. I appreciate his contributions to our SuperBowl title team and successful teams in the early 00's, but also remember the SB we lost, the Carolina disaster in the playoffs and at least a half dozen other games where his carelessness and foolhardy approach cost us ball games. On top of that, he's a high maintenance pain in the ass- not what we need for a franchise looking for stability and sound judgment from its front office employees and coaches.
    well said...agree totally.

  4. #4
    Guam rammer's Avatar
    Guam rammer is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Guam
    Age
    45
    Posts
    834
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    I see your point NJ but he won't be comming back as head coach and he wont be allowed to make those bone headed decissions, just run the offense. Both times Martz was released, by the Lions and the ******. I was somewhat surprised because both teams did show significant offensive production. Look at what happened to post Martz in Stl, 8-8, 3-13, 2-14. Detroit, 0-16. Same thing will happen in SF you'll see.

  5. #5
    Falconator Guest

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    while you guys are agreeing with me on "NO" to Mike Martz - the bigger point is that Jim Haslett does not really have a "plan" to make the Rams better if he is bringing back Mike Martz.

    It(Martz as OC) is just a "stunt" to try and get the Rams job......Just another example on why Jim Haslett would be a very, very poor hire if he is kept as head coach of the St. Louis Rams.....

    If Devaney is as smart as we think he is, the interview with Jim Haslett should have went something like this:

    Devaney: "So, Jim please go ahead and begin to tell me your plan for turning this Rams franchise around."

    Haslett: "I am going to bring Mike Martz back as offensive coordinator and......"

    Devaney: "Thanks for coming in today Jim. Have a great day"

  6. #6
    rampower's Avatar
    rampower is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    cumbria, UK
    Age
    41
    Posts
    832
    Rep Power
    28

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    I'm thinking martz may be more a stunt to sell tickets, team for sale and all. This team will be a hard sell to the 2 or 3 coaches (ex-co-ordinators) that are top of the availability list at the moment and everybody presumes they will automatically be brilliant head coaches.

    Whilst I agree and do see the need for a new direction, if we cant attract a new coach (spagnolo/ryan or another top candidate) haslett may be the best choice left. The talent level, ownership uncertainty (with the thought that the rams may move if they are sold) it might not happen.

    I will believe Martz when I see it though!
    The Breakfast Club. You want cheese with that?

  7. #7
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    59

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    Everybody says that power running is a better way to build a championship team, but to be fair, the Patriots and Colts have not only won Super Bowls in recent years but come close to going undefeated by throwing the ball significantly more than they run. We threw 55% on the way to Super Bowl 34 and 57% of the time on the way to Super Bowl 36 in the GSOT years. Compare that to the 17-0 2007 Patriots who threw 57% or the 2006 Super Bowl Champion Colts who threw 56% of the time. In fact, half the teams that threw at least 60% of the time this year made the playoffs.

    I think the fallacy here is assuming that a power running game and a good defense have to go hand in hand. A power running game requires you to have a good defense because you can't afford to fall behind. That is a model that can work. On the other hand, a team that can go to the air consistently and has a good defense is more dangerous because you can't put them out of the game. They can still put up points quickly even when they're down. There's increased risk of turnovers when you air it out, but you can also compensate more easily when things don't go your way.

    The main point is that there have been some very good teams that have won with defense and a ground game in recent years (i.e. the Giants or the Steelers), but the ones setting records and threatening to go undefeated have been the ones that could pass at will (i.e. the Patriots and Colts).

  8. #8
    Falconator Guest

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenfleece View Post
    Everybody says that power running is a better way to build a championship team, but to be fair, the Patriots and Colts have not only won Super Bowls in recent years but come close to going undefeated by throwing the ball significantly more than they run. We threw 55% on the way to Super Bowl 34 and 57% of the time on the way to Super Bowl 36 in the GSOT years. Compare that to the 17-0 2007 Patriots who threw 57% or the 2006 Super Bowl Champion Colts who threw 56% of the time. In fact, half the teams that threw at least 60% of the time this year made the playoffs.

    I think the fallacy here is assuming that a power running game and a good defense have to go hand in hand. A power running game requires you to have a good defense because you can't afford to fall behind. That is a model that can work. On the other hand, a team that can go to the air consistently and has a good defense is more dangerous because you can't put them out of the game. They can still put up points quickly even when they're down. There's increased risk of turnovers when you air it out, but you can also compensate more easily when things don't go your way.

    The main point is that there have been some very good teams that have won with defense and a ground game in recent years (i.e. the Giants or the Steelers), but the ones setting records and threatening to go undefeated have been the ones that could pass at will (i.e. the Patriots and Colts).
    Patriots have Tom Brady...
    Colts have Peyton Manning...
    Rams have Marc Bulger....

    Now let's play a little game called "which one of these things is not like the other, which one is not quite the same?"......c'mon everybody sing-a-long.......

  9. #9
    NJ Ramsfan1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,192
    Rep Power
    69

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenfleece View Post
    Everybody says that power running is a better way to build a championship team, but to be fair, the Patriots and Colts have not only won Super Bowls in recent years but come close to going undefeated by throwing the ball significantly more than they run. We threw 55% on the way to Super Bowl 34 and 57% of the time on the way to Super Bowl 36 in the GSOT years. Compare that to the 17-0 2007 Patriots who threw 57% or the 2006 Super Bowl Champion Colts who threw 56% of the time. In fact, half the teams that threw at least 60% of the time this year made the playoffs.

    I think the fallacy here is assuming that a power running game and a good defense have to go hand in hand. A power running game requires you to have a good defense because you can't afford to fall behind. That is a model that can work. On the other hand, a team that can go to the air consistently and has a good defense is more dangerous because you can't put them out of the game. They can still put up points quickly even when they're down. There's increased risk of turnovers when you air it out, but you can also compensate more easily when things don't go your way.

    The main point is that there have been some very good teams that have won with defense and a ground game in recent years (i.e. the Giants or the Steelers), but the ones setting records and threatening to go undefeated have been the ones that could pass at will (i.e. the Patriots and Colts).

    Understood, Goldenfleece, but the two examples you cite, Indianapolis and New England have Hall of Fame Quarterbacks and feature wide receivers who are among the best who have ever played the sport. They are the exceptions to the rule. Most teams will see only moderate success if they can't run the ball. Pittsburgh (Bettis), Dallas (Emmitt), Baltimore (Jamaal Lewis) and the Rams (Faulk) are among the teams in the 00's who won Super Bowls with quality running backs.

    And not for nothing, teams who like to grind it out tend to be tougher, in my opinion- a trait the Rams sorely lack. Like I said earlier, the "air Martz" antics were exciting and electrifying, but not something that is sustainable for a long time. A team's best shot at being consistent winners lies in a healthy pass/run balance and solid, if unspectacular defense.

  10. #10
    MauiRam's Avatar
    MauiRam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Maui, Hi.
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,766
    Rep Power
    79

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    If a team possesses the personnel to execute a power running game, it doesn't necessarily mean that team must run the ball 50% of its offensive plays. But it does afford said team the luxury of keeping opposing defenses honest if said team has a respectable if not scary passing attack. If not then opposing defenses will stack the box to take away the run, and dare the offense to throw before the qb gets creamed - something us Ram fans have witnessed a good deal of the last few years.

    I am not advocating bringing back Martz, (there are too many extenuating circumstances of which I know nothing - that's why I'm a fan and Billy D. is GM.) However, I don't think it is impossible for the Rams to have a power running game with Martz as OC. Martz would no longer be able to squander draft picks, and could focus on running the offense. As Laramo wrote in another thread -- it's the O-line that makes both the run and pass successful. I'm sure Martz knows that you cannot be one dimensional in today's NFL and expect to win Super Bowls.

    Lately when opposing defenses have dared us to throw or run we haven't been able to answer the call .. It isn't all coaching folks - plain and simple we need better players with particular emphasis on the O-line. We need guys that can dominate whether pass blocking or run blocking. Those guys are hard to find, but that's why Chip took the reins away from JZ and handed them to Billy D. Should be an interesting off season and draft ...

  11. #11
    chndlr54 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    illinois
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    Mike Martz would make a good QB coach.There are far better assistant coaches than he is.Maybe te ex coach from boston college.

  12. #12
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    59

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    Understood, Goldenfleece, but the two examples you cite, Indianapolis and New England have Hall of Fame Quarterbacks and feature wide receivers who are among the best who have ever played the sport. They are the exceptions to the rule. Most teams will see only moderate success if they can't run the ball. Pittsburgh (Bettis), Dallas (Emmitt), Baltimore (Jamaal Lewis) and the Rams (Faulk) are among the teams in the 00's who won Super Bowls with quality running backs.
    Well, there are certainly others. Phillie has made it to the playoffs frequently by airing it out. Back when Chucky was in Oakland, they made it to the Super Bowl with a predominately pass-based attack. The Rams would be another recent example. Or Kerry Collins and the Giants when they made it to the big one against Baltimore.

    Obviously, it helps to have a quality runningback, but the question seemed to be whether it would be preferable to have a system based on power running or a "Greatest Show" inspired aerial attack. My argument would be that until you've got that stifling defense, you're just not going to win many games with an offense that relies on running the ball and controlling the clock. That's why the only power running/defense teams you see in the playoffs are the good ones, whereas you see passing teams with both good and bad defenses that sometimes make it deep into the playoffs (because they still win games when the defense doesn't come through).

  13. #13
    Curly Horns's Avatar
    Curly Horns is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    1st & Goal
    Posts
    2,571
    Rep Power
    58

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    Quote Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
    this is hysterical.............

    Jim Haslett, what happened to "we want to run the ball, and stop the run" philosophy?......

    Just another example of why Jim Haslett should not be the Rams next head coach.......Rams need to go in a new direction - not return to the past.

    Passing 60% of the time is not a formula for a team to be successful most of the time........

    This is a desperation move by Haslett to try and get the Rams job - just another example of why Jim Haslett should not be head coach of the Rams..
    Extremely hard to beleive you are really a falcons fan. Still don't understand why the fan of another team cares so much about who the Rams hire for a head coach. Add in your obvious hate for haslett and it makes even less sense. Personally, I don't believe you and I'm also very surprised others have not said anything.

    Regardless of all that, this post, like the majority of your posts, is the absolute epitome of stupidity.




  14. #14
    PARamfan's Avatar
    PARamfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    529
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    A sound coaching philosophy balances the run with the pass. Too much empahsis on one over the other usually ends up in disappointment and teams that are one dimensional will only go so far. The pass happy Rams nonetheless had Marshall Faulk, who allowed Kurt Warner and the receivers to work their magic. When idiot Martz tried to outcoach himself and only ran Marshall 14 times in SuperBowl XXXVI, we got beat. Warner put up great yardage numbers, but they meant nothing- we lost.

    While passing teams are exciting to watch, RUNNING the ball is essential to clock management and wearing down your opponent. A successful passing game opens up the offense, but the running game opens up the passing game.

    I am not in favor of bringing Martz back here. People tend to have short memories- Martz gave us just as many headaches and stupid decisions as he did excitement during his tenure here. I appreciate his contributions to our SuperBowl title team and successful teams in the early 00's, but also remember the SB we lost, the Carolina disaster in the playoffs and at least a half dozen other games where his carelessness and foolhardy approach cost us ball games. On top of that, he's a high maintenance pain in the ass- not what we need for a franchise looking for stability and sound judgment from its front office employees and coaches.
    This is the best post in this thread.Totally agree with all of it.Rep to you.

  15. #15
    Truth's Avatar
    Truth is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Age
    54
    Posts
    1,389
    Rep Power
    36

    Re: Mike Freakin' Martz? Sounds Like "Back to the Future" - where is Michael J. Fox?

    I've already stated on other threads that I do not want Martz. I think Martz is to the coaching staff as TO is to the locker room. He has had trouble with every team he has coached with. I don't see any teams chomping at the bit to hire this guy.
    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. They Said It: Quotes from Rams Park
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -10-25-2005, 08:04 AM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: -01-03-2005, 11:25 AM
  3. Replies: 238
    Last Post: -12-27-2004, 01:04 PM
  4. Letters to Gordo: They're mad about Mike
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -09-10-2004, 03:16 PM
  5. Rams’ Martz knew Bulger would be special
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 161
    Last Post: -07-17-2004, 03:44 AM

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
  •