Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 53
  1. #1
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,543
    Rep Power
    167

    Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    The Seattle Seahawks are the defending NFC Champions.

    The Rams went 6-10 last year.

    So, clearly, the Seahawks will be the better team in 2006, right?

    I'm not so sure.

    All I can do at this point is look at the rosters and compare the two teams (as objectively as a long time Rams fan can).

    The offensive comparison is easy. The Rams clearly have at least as much talent as Seattle. Marc Bulger is as good a QB as Matt Hasselbeck. The Rams O line is very similar to Seattle's - at least now that Steve Hutchinson is gone. Both have top notch LTs, a combination 30+ interior linemen, and a young RT (Barron, in my opinion, may actually make the Rams line superior to the Hawks'). At RB, Alexander is certainly a more proven player than Jackson, but RB is a young man's position, and Jackson is likely to close that gap. At WR, the Rams are clearly superior. At TE... who knows (but the Rams' rookies are at least promising).

    So, it must be the defense that makes Seattle superior, right?

    Um... I'm not so sure.

    Are Grant Wistrom and Bryce Fisher clearly better than Tony Hargrove and Leonard Little? I don't think so. Are Darby and Barnard (or Tubbs) better than Glover and Kennedy (or Wroten)? Again, I don't see it.

    At LB, Seattle may have the advantage with Lofa Tatupu and newly acquired Julian Peterson, but are they really that much better than Witherspoon and Tinoisamoa?

    The DBs are also comparable. Marcus Trufant is very talented, and Boulware's a playmaker, but if Jeremetrius Butler can regain his form and Tye Hill lives up to his potential, is there a huge gap here?

    There is a gap between Seattle and the Rams that needs to be closed. We saw it last year. But that gap, in my opinion, was the result of coaching issues, injuries and inexperience. It was NOT THE RESULT OF TALENT!

    As far as I'm concerned, the Rams are as much a contender in the NFC West as anyone.
    Last edited by AvengerRam; -07-31-2006 at 10:56 AM.


  2. #2
    Large_Ant's Avatar
    Large_Ant is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Age
    43
    Posts
    200
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    That's weird. Hey Avenger, there were at least two replies to this post: mine and one other one from another Ram fan. What happened? Were they the wrong answers and therefore got deleted?
    ----------------------------------------------------
    Seattle Seahawks - 2004 & 2005 NFC West Champions

  3. #3
    bigredman's Avatar
    bigredman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    El Paso, Texas
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,815
    Rep Power
    61

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    You are probably right. Their schedules are almost identical as far as opponents this coming year. The one true downside is that the Rams are installing new schemes on both offense and defense. While such change was needed, it will nonetheless have an impact at least at the beginning of the season (missed assignments, busted plays, etc). The Rams have more new players coming in that don't have that much experience with each other as compared to the Hawks as well. That's where I see the Hawks having an advantage, consistency and familiarity.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  4. #4
    JackieSlater's Avatar
    JackieSlater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Age
    42
    Posts
    667
    Rep Power
    24

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    Yes, i'm having this probelm as well, can only see the 1st post in every thread i post to, plus also my post history as disappeared. i've PMed Dez, just awaiting a reply

  5. #5
    Large_Ant's Avatar
    Large_Ant is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Age
    43
    Posts
    200
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by bigredman
    You are probably right. Their schedules are almost identical as far as opponents this coming year. The one true downside is that the Rams are installing new schemes on both offense and defense. While such change was needed, it will nonetheless have an impact at least at the beginning of the season (missed assignments, busted plays, etc). The Rams have more new players coming in that don't have that much experience with each other as compared to the Hawks as well. That's where I see the Hawks having an advantage, consistency and familiarity.
    This was the exact essense of my earlier post that has since disappeared.
    ----------------------------------------------------
    Seattle Seahawks - 2004 & 2005 NFC West Champions

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Glenrothes, SCOTLAND
    Posts
    9,963
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    We moved servers, things will be weird for 24hrs then should be back. you might have posted pre move


  7. #7
    bigredman's Avatar
    bigredman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    El Paso, Texas
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,815
    Rep Power
    61

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by Large_Ant
    This was the exact essense of my earlier post that has since disappeared.
    Oh my god...I'm thinking like a hawk fan? BTW, never saw your post in this thread.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  8. #8
    Large_Ant's Avatar
    Large_Ant is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Age
    43
    Posts
    200
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by bigredman
    Oh my god...I'm thinking like a hawk fan? BTW, never saw your post in this thread.
    I don't think you copied me, I think we're in agreement because it's pretty obvious. The Rams certainly have a comparable talent level but the familiarity angle is a point that is certainly missing in the original post.

    You could make a pretty good case that the Cardinals have comparable talent to the Colts, but most of us would agree that the two are on different planes. While the gap between the Rams and the Seahawks isn't nearly as wide as that example, there is certainly more to it than just the comparison of individual talent.
    ----------------------------------------------------
    Seattle Seahawks - 2004 & 2005 NFC West Champions

  9. #9
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,308
    Rep Power
    127

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    I'd like to think the Rams are just as good as the Seahawks, but while their team has proven that they can get it done on the fiield, our team has not. Because the Seahawks have a lot less "ifs" than the Rams and at this point are a proven commodity, I would have to give them the nod as the better team. For now.

  10. #10
    bigredman's Avatar
    bigredman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    El Paso, Texas
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,815
    Rep Power
    61

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by Large_Ant
    I don't think you copied me, I think we're in agreement because it's pretty obvious. The Rams certainly have a comparable talent level but the familiarity angle is a point that is certainly missing in the original post.


    You could make a pretty good case that the Cardinals have comparable talent to the Colts, but most of us would agree that the two are on different planes. While the gap between the Rams and the Seahawks isn't nearly as wide as that example, there is certainly more to it than just the comparison of individual talent.
    This switching back and forth from server to server is driving me crazy. Don't know which post is staying or going here.


    Thanks buddy...wasn't sure if you thought I was plagiarizing you or not.

    Cardinals comparable to Colts? Kurt Warner at this stage of his career equal to Payton Manning? They have the Colts old running back, and the Cards have upgraded at receiver. Hmmmmmmmm....although I see where you are headed with this, I don't think the Cards are there with the Colts this year. They need more time together, and I'm not convinced that Green can lead a team to the NFC championship.
    Last edited by bigredman; -07-31-2006 at 06:58 PM.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  11. #11
    rammiser's Avatar
    rammiser is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Age
    41
    Posts
    2,002
    Rep Power
    58

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    I think confidence plays a huge part in whether the Rams or seahawks are better. Take last year for example If the Seahawks lose that first game vs the Rams i dont think they even make it to the Superbowl. I actually think the Seahawks were better than us the last two years but they couldnt get over the hump of beating us. Say the Rams start off 5-0 this year, that is a huge confidence builder for a lot of our young guys. Now if we start off 3-2 or 2-3 our young guys could start to pack it in and lose confidence. I think the talent is very comparible but where the intagibles are is in confidence in your team and your ability. For a while there the Seahawks just couldnt get over the hump of beating us and when they did I think that is when they started to believe they had something special. The Rams had that back in the day with S.F. and when the Rams started really beating them up in 99, it was a huge confidence builder. Our youth and inexperience on defense may very much depend on the success of the team in the first 5 games. Just my opinion of course but you never know what can happen in this day and age when any team can come out of nowhere and win it all.
    Just Fix It

  12. #12
    kman555's Avatar
    kman555 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    3
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    you watch what differnce our defense will be with haslett..no more of martz' underqualified college buddies running it..im very excited about the change of coaching on both sides of the ball..seatlle is going to have superboewl hangover...everything went right for them last year..they will come back down to earth..

  13. #13
    Ahbatu Ujeema's Avatar
    Ahbatu Ujeema is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    indiola
    Posts
    29
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    Biggest difference I see is the Rams have no one on the same planet close to Wistrom, other than that, Rams 2006 D is going to surprise lots of people.

  14. #14
    LaRamsFanLongTime's Avatar
    LaRamsFanLongTime is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Foothill Ranch CA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    808
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    The DBs are also comparable. Marcus Trufant is very talented, and Boulware's a playmaker, but if Jeremetrius Butler can regain his form and Tye Hill lives up to his potential, is there a huge gap here?
    The talent level gap in the secondary might not seem huge but that Seahawk secondary really gells well. They play great team ball in that secondary. Sorry I said that Im still a Clan Rammer right??
    LET'S GO DODGERS

  15. #15
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,564
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Somebody explain to me why the Rams can't be as good, or better, than Seattle

    Quote Originally Posted by Ahbatu Ujeema
    Biggest difference I see is the Rams have no one on the same planet close to Wistrom, other than that, Rams 2006 D is going to surprise lots of people.
    I'm not sure I follow you here. You may be letting your Husker roots come through with this one.

    Wistrom (30 years old) - 52 tackles, 4 sacks, 0 FF
    Hargrove (23 years old) - 51 tackles, 6.5 sacks, 0 FF
    Little (31 years old) - 56 tackles, 9.5 sacks, 4 FF

    I'd take either one of our guys over Wistrom at this point.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

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
  •