throwback week



Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 70
Like Tree5Likes

Thread: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

  1. #16
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by eldfan View Post
    Ok but something seems odd to me. One if the rams feel that they are that deep in the DE spots that they can’t activate him why draft him? The team doesn’t need a project DE if they feel he is not ready to get on the field especially when he is a top pick. Why not draft a player that can play right away and help win games now? It seem like they treated him as a project player hoping for something good down the road. It’s hard to believe he could not have help in passing situations
    I wouldn't get bent out of shape about his NFL readiness on account of one game. Deciding who to keep game-active isn't always a simple decision, especially when your first game of the year is against a team that has been getting Super Bowl buzz. Spags opted for experience. Given the short camp, it's understandable even if it was a bit of a surprise to the fans.


  2. #17
    NJ Ramsfan1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,462
    Rep Power
    74

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    We definitely must keep it in perspective because it is only one game, but I must say i am surprised that a guy we felt worthy of a number one pick didn't suit up.

  3. #18
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,709
    Rep Power
    37

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    We obviusly don't see eye to eye and that's fine.

    You have your opinion and I have mine, but there simply is no comparison between DX and Brandon Gibson, from a pure ability stanpoint, when DX is healthy. I know it, and you know it.

    And I guess, not so obvious to you, I make my arguement based on him when he is healthy. So we can eliminate any reference to what he can and cannot do as far as workloads for a number one or two WR is concerned.

    Also, I've never made one reference to DX's college career in my support of him, though admittedly, it was rather impressive. Instead I make my arguement solely based on his Ram career.

    To me, he was by far, the most dynamic receiver on the Rams roster last year and he still is. When he entered the game, you got the feeling that something big was about to happen. I don't get that feeling from any other receiver on this roster.

    To voluntarily take that element away from an offense as vanilla as ours has been for a season and one game, I believe is crucial.

    No defense is even remotely afraid of our offense. And why should they be? We don't even activate the one receiver on the roster, that might put a little fear in the defense.

    Say what you want about Brandon Gibson's so-called steady climb in competence/reliability, I saw the exact same Brandon Gibson who's led the team in drops since he's been here. Not to mention, his propensity for running routes short of the first down marker. Outside of the opposing team, who could be a fan of that?

    I'll not only take an occasional flash of brilliance any day over that, I'll also ensure that that occasional flash becomes a frequent flash, by activating it, when it is healthy.

    As for Mr. Curry, I don't deny that we need people who sre ready, willing and able to play special teams. I just don't believe most games are won or lost in that facet of the game.

    And since that is what I believe, it is easy to follow why I might choose to activate a play-making WR over a special teams player. Particularly when you have argueably the best kicking tandem in the NFL.

    If you have a poor kick coverage team, there are things great kickers can do to off-set some of those things. Like kicking away from dangerous returners, or getting great hangtime on punts. With the ball moved back to the 35 yard line for kickoffs, there will be more touchbacks this season than any season in recent memory. So, the need for an extra kick cover man is lessened when you have great kickers, which the Rams do, IMO.

    Thus oppening a spot on the active roster for a player who can make a world of difference for a receiving corps. that's less than dynamic.

  4. #19
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,564
    Rep Power
    45

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    We obviusly don't see eye to eye and that's fine.

    You have your opinion and I have mine, but there simply is no comparison between DX and Brandon Gibson, from a pure ability stanpoint, when DX is healthy. I know it, and you know it.

    And I guess, not so obvious to you, I make my arguement based on him when he is healthy. So we can eliminate any reference to what he can and cannot do as far as workloads for a number one or two WR is concerned.

    Also, I've never made one reference to DX's college career in my support of him, though admittedly, it was rather impressive. Instead I make my arguement solely based on his Ram career.

    To me, he was by far, the most dynamic receiver on the Rams roster last year and he still is. When he entered the game, you got the feeling that something big was about to happen. I don't get that feeling from any other receiver on this roster.

    To voluntarily take that element away from an offense as vanilla as ours has been for a season and one game, I believe is crucial.

    No defense is even remotely afraid of our offense. And why should they be? We don't even activate the one receiver on the roster, that might put a little fear in the defense.

    Say what you want about Brandon Gibson's so-called steady climb in competence/reliability, I saw the exact same Brandon Gibson who's led the team in drops since he's been here. Not to mention, his propensity for running routes short of the first down marker. Outside of the opposing team, who could be a fan of that?

    I'll not only take an occasional flash of brilliance any day over that, I'll also ensure that that occasional flash becomes a frequent flash, by activating it, when it is healthy.

    As for Mr. Curry, I don't deny that we need people who sre ready, willing and able to play special teams. I just don't believe most games are won or lost in that facet of the game.

    And since that is what I believe, it is easy to follow why I might choose to activate a play-making WR over a special teams player. Particularly when you have argueably the best kicking tandem in the NFL.

    If you have a poor kick coverage team, there are things great kickers can do to off-set some of those things. Like kicking away from dangerous returners, or getting great hangtime on punts. With the ball moved back to the 35 yard line for kickoffs, there will be more touchbacks this season than any season in recent memory. So, the need for an extra kick cover man is lessened when you have great kickers, which the Rams do, IMO.

    Thus oppening a spot on the active roster for a player who can make a world of difference for a receiving corps. that's less than dynamic.
    The best post I've seen around here in a while. I feel the exact same way. If you're going to get rid of a guy like Avery to keep DX inactive on game days you have to be on something.

    When healthy DX BY FAR is our best WR. The only one close is Mark Clayton. Amendola is solid in the slot. If we had a #1 and any of our WR's as #2, Danny would be the best slot guy in the NFL.

    When DX is in he makes big plays. He always grabs a catch deep which none of our WR's can do. And I totally agree on the Gibson thought.

    Still the same old guy. Leads us in drops, and doesn't really benefit anything.

  5. #20
    Azul e Oro is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CALIFORNIA
    Posts
    2,438
    Rep Power
    72

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    We obviusly don't see eye to eye and that's fine.

    You have your opinion and I have mine, but there simply is no comparison between DX and Brandon Gibson, from a pure ability stanpoint, when DX is healthy. I know it, and you know it.

    And I guess, not so obvious to you, I make my arguement based on him when he is healthy. So we can eliminate any reference to what he can and cannot do as far as workloads for a number one or two WR is concerned.

    Also, I've never made one reference to DX's college career in my support of him, though admittedly, it was rather impressive. Instead I make my arguement solely based on his Ram career.

    To me, he was by far, the most dynamic receiver on the Rams roster last year and he still is. When he entered the game, you got the feeling that something big was about to happen. I don't get that feeling from any other receiver on this roster.

    To voluntarily take that element away from an offense as vanilla as ours has been for a season and one game, I believe is crucial.

    No defense is even remotely afraid of our offense. And why should they be? We don't even activate the one receiver on the roster, that might put a little fear in the defense.

    Say what you want about Brandon Gibson's so-called steady climb in competence/reliability, I saw the exact same Brandon Gibson who's led the team in drops since he's been here. Not to mention, his propensity for running routes short of the first down marker. Outside of the opposing team, who could be a fan of that?

    I'll not only take an occasional flash of brilliance any day over that, I'll also ensure that that occasional flash becomes a frequent flash, by activating it, when it is healthy.

    As for Mr. Curry, I don't deny that we need people who sre ready, willing and able to play special teams. I just don't believe most games are won or lost in that facet of the game.

    And since that is what I believe, it is easy to follow why I might choose to activate a play-making WR over a special teams player. Particularly when you have argueably the best kicking tandem in the NFL.

    If you have a poor kick coverage team, there are things great kickers can do to off-set some of those things. Like kicking away from dangerous returners, or getting great hangtime on punts. With the ball moved back to the 35 yard line for kickoffs, there will be more touchbacks this season than any season in recent memory. So, the need for an extra kick cover man is lessened when you have great kickers, which the Rams do, IMO.

    Thus oppening a spot on the active roster for a player who can make a world of difference for a receiving corps. that's less than dynamic.
    I don't want to put words into your mouth but what I hear from you is that Spags is wrong, in your opinion, not to play DX regardless of whether he produces or not. DX contributed in 6 games last year, with 2-3 games of riding the pine between each pair. He was good one game, then disappeared in the next.Then the bench. Rinse & repeat. Look at the stats; it happened three freakin' times, the last, unfortunately being the critical Hags game.He is the very epitome of consistent inconsistency.

    20 catches for 304 yds and 1 TD. That's the career you're basing this on?

    I'd love for the "good DX" to show up two or more games in a row & be a success but I can understand why the inconsistency is important to Spags when he picks the game day roster. I don't think you make yourself vulnerable on STs or keep a player off the field who makes the routine plays more of the time for the hope of winning the DX lotto. This squad needs more consistency top to bottom, not less of it,imo.

    You can hold onto the idea that DX is being held back by Spags if you want but it doesn't have much logic or fact behind it.Nobody drafted him, the pro staff who work with him every day haven't seen enough to back him like you do but they kept him,no? There simply isn't the production to rate this guy as deserving of the risk you'd take for, say, a Plaxico in his non-practicing but regular difference maker/ gamer prime. He's a project.

    They're giving DX a chance to get there but have some patience. I just can't see the reason to doubt how they are handling it except , as you repeatedly claim, his talent is so much greater than Gibson despite Gibson having produced more consistently.Btw, Gibby kept chugging along in both the games in which DX was productive , those he wasn't, and all the games when DX rode the pine. I don't like Gibson's mistakes any more than you do but you are ignoring the growing positives about him & the fact that DX has had some critical drops himself. Treat them both objectively is all I'm saying.
    Last edited by Azul e Oro; -09-18-2011 at 03:34 AM.

  6. #21
    sjacksonrules's Avatar
    sjacksonrules is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    southern il
    Posts
    1,459
    Rep Power
    31

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Fortuninerhater you are over looking who we were playing. The eagles had great corners so we decided to let him sit to rest his knee when he could make a difference in the game. We went into the game hoping to use the run and screen game and it just didn't work out, stuff happens. Spags did not want DX's knee taking shots unnecessarily.

  7. #22
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,709
    Rep Power
    37

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Azul e Oro View Post
    I don't want to put words into your mouth but what I hear from you is that Spags is wrong, in your opinion, not to play DX regardless of whether he produces or not. DX contributed in 6 games last year, with 2-3 games of riding the pine between each pair. He was good one game, then disappeared in the next.Then the bench. Rinse & repeat. Look at the stats; it happened three freakin' times, the last, unfortunately being the critical Hags game.He is the very epitome of consistent inconsistency.

    20 catches for 304 yds and 1 TD. That's the career you're basing this on?

    I'd love for the "good DX" to show up two or more games in a row & be a success but I can understand why the inconsistency is important to Spags when he picks the game day roster. I don't think you make yourself vulnerable on STs or keep a player off the field who makes the routine plays more of the time for the hope of winning the DX lotto. This squad needs more consistency top to bottom, not less of it,imo.

    You can hold onto the idea that DX is being held back by Spags if you want but it doesn't have much logic or fact behind it.Nobody drafted him, the pro staff who work with him every day haven't seen enough to back him like you do but they kept him,no? There simply isn't the production to rate this guy as deserving of the risk you'd take for, say, a Plaxico in his non-practicing but regular difference maker/ gamer prime. He's a project.

    They're giving DX a chance to get there but have some patience. I just can't see the reason to doubt how they are handling it except , as you repeatedly claim, his talent is so much greater than Gibson despite Gibson having produced more consistently.Btw, Gibby kept chugging along in both the games in which DX was productive , those he wasn't, and all the games when DX rode the pine. I don't like Gibson's mistakes any more than you do but you are ignoring the growing positives about him & the fact that DX has had some critical drops himself. Treat them both objectively is all I'm saying.
    Well, it is well documented that I don't agree with much as far as Spags philosophy is concerned. But how can anybody know whether DX will produce or not unless he plays in the game?

    I hear everything you're saying, but my arguement is simply, whenever DX is healthy, he should be in uniform and on the field, period. This WR corps, in spite of what some of you may think, ranks in the bottom half of the league.

    So I see absolutely no reason for someone as talented as DX to be inactive when he is healthy, while everybody else is given the benefit of the doubt.

    And it doesn't matter who we're playing as Sjacksonrules eluded to, because if I'm Asomugha, Revis, Samuel or any other corner in the league, the last receiver from this roster I want to see coming at me, is DX.
    Last edited by Fortuninerhater; -09-18-2011 at 12:39 PM.

  8. #23
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,064
    Rep Power
    131

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Also, I've never made one reference to DX's college career in my support of him, though admittedly, it was rather impressive. Instead I make my arguement solely based on his Ram career.

    To me, he was by far, the most dynamic receiver on the Rams roster last year and he still is. When he entered the game, you got the feeling that something big was about to happen. I don't get that feeling from any other receiver on this roster.
    Can anybody really disagree with this? He is exactly what Fortuninerhater said he is, dynamic. His mere presence on the field changes the way defenses have to look at the Rams offense. He is the only Rams WR who can effectively stretch the field and is always a big play threat. He needs to be on the field.

  9. #24
    Azul e Oro is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CALIFORNIA
    Posts
    2,438
    Rep Power
    72

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike View Post
    Can anybody really disagree with this? He is exactly what Fortuninerhater said he is, dynamic. His mere presence on the field changes the way defenses have to look at the Rams offense. He is the only Rams WR who can effectively stretch the field and is always a big play threat. He needs to be on the field.
    Feelings?!! Mere presence?!! LMAO... You guys are mancrushing so hard, it's making me uncomfortable.
    The Rams have won without DX & lost with him. I think you need to accept the fact that DX's handful of big plays are just as likely to be because defenses DON'T change to account for him which is why he gets open deep every now & then. I posit that defenses are paying extra attention to Amendola, Jackson, and Gibson which benefits DX, not the other way around.

    I'll wait to see tangible results of this mystique before I buy into it. I'd be glad to see it happen.

  10. #25
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,868
    Rep Power
    154

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Not one receiver on this team is better than DX when he is healthy, IMO.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    You have your opinion and I have mine, but there simply is no comparison between DX and Brandon Gibson, from a pure ability stanpoint, when DX is healthy. I know it, and you know it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    And I guess, not so obvious to you, I make my arguement based on him when he is healthy. So we can eliminate any reference to what he can and cannot do as far as workloads for a number one or two WR is concerned.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    I'll not only take an occasional flash of brilliance any day over that, I'll also ensure that that occasional flash becomes a frequent flash, by activating it, when it is healthy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    I hear everything you're saying, but my arguement is simply, whenever DX is healthy, he should be in uniform and on the field, period.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    So I see absolutely no reason for someone as talented as DX to be inactive when he is healthy, while everybody else is given the benefit of the doubt.
    But that's the issue - will Danario Alexander ever be "healthy" again? How do you define "healthy?"

    Maybe it's a relative term for someone like DX, who has been through five surgeries and declined a sixth on a knee that, according to the Rams' head trainer, will never get better because of degenerative changes. According to Scott, they're simply trying to maintain what little is left to work with in there.

    So in a sense, Alexander will never be healthy again, if by healthy you mean at 100%. At best, he's probably closer to 75-80%. After needing to have his knee drained and declining a suggested sixth surgery, maybe now he's closer to 50-60%. Who knows, but the point is he's not working with a set of parts that's passed inspection with flying colors. That doesn't mean he can't make any plays - we saw last year that he can in certain situations - but it definitely limits what he's able to do on a given day and in the long-term.

    Therefore, how meaningful is a debate about DX's ability "when healthy?" Sure, you can argue that DX is the Rams' best receiver when healthy, and that can be debated. But if he's never truly healthy due to the knee, then it seems like a moot point.

  11. #26
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,064
    Rep Power
    131

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Azul e Oro View Post
    Feelings?!! Mere presence?!! LMAO... You guys are mancrushing so hard, it's making me uncomfortable.
    The Rams have won without DX & lost with him. I think you need to accept the fact that DX's handful of big plays are just as likely to be because defenses DON'T change to account for him which is why he gets open deep every now & then. I posit that defenses are paying extra attention to Amendola, Jackson, and Gibson which benefits DX, not the other way around.

    I'll wait to see tangible results of this mystique before I buy into it. I'd be glad to see it happen.
    So you don't think he gives defenses something different to think about when he's on the field? Really?

    At least we can all agree about wanting to see him on the field so he can prove what he can or can't do.

  12. #27
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,709
    Rep Power
    37

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    But that's the issue - will Danario Alexander ever be "healthy" again? How do you define "healthy?"

    Maybe it's a relative term for someone like DX, who has been through five surgeries and declined a sixth on a knee that, according to the Rams' head trainer, will never get better because of degenerative changes. According to Scott, they're simply trying to maintain what little is left to work with in there.

    So in a sense, Alexander will never be healthy again, if by healthy you mean at 100%. At best, he's probably closer to 75-80%. After needing to have his knee drained and declining a suggested sixth surgery, maybe now he's closer to 50-60%. Who knows, but the point is he's not working with a set of parts that's passed inspection with flying colors. That doesn't mean he can't make any plays - we saw last year that he can in certain situations - but it definitely limits what he's able to do on a given day and in the long-term.

    Therefore, how meaningful is a debate about DX's ability "when healthy?" Sure, you can argue that DX is the Rams' best receiver when healthy, and that can be debated. But if he's never truly healthy due to the knee, then it seems like a moot point.
    By healthy I mean able to get on the field and contribute to one of the worse receiving corps in the league, at whatever percentage that is. In other words there'd be no arguement if Spags had come out and said, DX is inactive because he is injured or physically unable to perform. Outside of that, my arguement stands.
    Last edited by Fortuninerhater; -09-18-2011 at 05:50 PM.

  13. #28
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,709
    Rep Power
    37

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Azul e Oro View Post
    Feelings?!! Mere presence?!! LMAO... You guys are mancrushing so hard, it's making me uncomfortable.
    The Rams have won without DX & lost with him. I think you need to accept the fact that DX's handful of big plays are just as likely to be because defenses DON'T change to account for him which is why he gets open deep every now & then. I posit that defenses are paying extra attention to Amendola, Jackson, and Gibson which benefits DX, not the other way around.

    I'll wait to see tangible results of this mystique before I buy into it. I'd be glad to see it happen.
    I believe the discomfort you feel is due to the fact that you know you can't reasonably argue with my point if you're being honest with yourself.
    Last edited by Fortuninerhater; -09-18-2011 at 05:31 PM.

  14. #29
    NJ Ramsfan1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,462
    Rep Power
    74

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    I have to agree with Azul e Oro here. Danario Alexander has done absolutely nothing to justify the adulation given to him by some on the board. That he is held in such high regard despite limited production is a testament to just how pathetic our wide receivers have been for the past 2 plus seasons. There comes a time when talent and potential alone don't get it done.

    Our receiving corps has been a cesspool of underachievers, injury-riddled liabilities and waiver wire pick ups. Clayton and Alexander- arguably the two top guys in terms of talent haven't been able to stay healthy. The one player who has actually OVERACHIEVED- Amendola, is hurt. And we are currently faced with the same situation we had last year: An up-and-coming young QB with limited options offensively.

    I don't buy the "how do you know he can't get the job done if he isn't given chances?" argument. This is the refrain sung by every guy who ever warmed the bench and every fan who would rather see someone else in there. Obviously the coaches- who all know a helluva lot more than we do- have not seen enough to warrant giving him more time. In most every sport, a 2nd string guy's playing time is dictated not only by the production (or lack thereof) of the guys in front of him but by how he performs in practice. And if you're never out there for practice because you are hurt or need rest, that's a problem.

    Listen- I want to see the guy succeed just like every other Ram fan, but let's put away the anointing oil and see Alexander for who he really is: a guy whose true capabilities will never be known at this level unless he stays healthy for a prolonged period of time and performs well enough in practice to earn the supreme confidence of the coaches.
    Last edited by NJ Ramsfan1; -09-18-2011 at 06:22 PM.

  15. #30
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,709
    Rep Power
    37

    re: Rams' Quinn Calls Benching 'A Shocker' (evolution: DX inactive?)

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    I have to agree with Azul e Oro here. Danario Alexander has done absolutely nothing to justify the adulation given to him by some on the board. That he is held in such high regard despite limited production is a testament to just how pathetic our wide receivers have been for the past 2 plus seasons. There comes a time when talent and potential alone don't get it done.

    Our receiving corps has been a cesspool of underachievers, injury-riddled liabilities and waiver wire pick ups. Clayton and Alexander- arguably the two top guys in terms of talent haven't been able to stay healthy. The one player who has actually OVERACHIEVED- Amendola, is hurt. And we are currently faced with the same situation we had last year: An up-and-coming young QB with limited options offensively.

    I don't buy the "how do you know he can't get the job done if he isn't given chances?" argument. This is the refrain sung by every guy who ever warmed the bench and every fan who would rather see someone else in there. Obviously the coaches- who all know a helluva lot more than we do- have not seen enough to warrant giving him more time. In most every sport, a 2nd string guy's playing time is dictated not only by the production (or lack thereof) of the guys in front of him but by how he performs in practice. And if you're never out there for practice because you are hurt or need rest, that's a problem.

    Listen- I want to see the guy succeed just like every other Ram fan, but let's put away the anointing oil and see Alexander for who he really is: a guy whose true capabilities will never be known at this level unless he stays healthy for a prolonged period of time and performs well enough in practice to earn the supreme confidence of the coaches.
    You'd make a valid point if our receivers weren't a "cesspool of underachievers", as you put it. That characterization alone, speaks to why this arguement has gone on so long.

    Makes me think that the most talented of the bunch would be afforded the opportunity to play whenever he's healthy.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Rams Inactive, Jerseys
    By sosa39rams in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: -12-26-2010, 08:32 PM
  2. Calvin Johnson inactive for Lions against Rams
    By tomahawk247 in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -11-01-2009, 01:04 PM
  3. Learning To Lead: The Evolution Of Steven Jackson
    By r8rh8rmike in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -10-08-2009, 04:01 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: -09-14-2008, 12:53 PM
  5. Inactive Rams
    By dagenram in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: -09-12-2006, 10:12 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
  •