Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 53
  1. #31
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    59

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

    Et tu, Opimh? I think we basically field two left tackles; it just so happens one of them is playing on the right. They are good players, but I agree that both do pass block better than they run block. I'm not so sure about Seattle's interior line. During the Super Bowl, I couldn't help thinking Seattle ought to be trying to run to the outside because they were doing nothing up the middle. Then the network showed a highlight reel of Alexander runs, and sure enough every last run on the highlight reel was to the outside. So I thought I'd take a look on some youtube highlights, and what I saw somewhat confirmed my suspicions. Sure, Hutchison looked good, but I also saw a number of plays where defenders were in the backfield and the guard or center who was supposed to be blocking them was on the ground--not pancaking a guy, just on the ground. But Alexander could still escape to that left side, where Jones was usually still driving his opponent downfield.

    Hard to argue on the secondary. We could be fielding anywhere between one and four different starters from last year. I think we will almost certainly improve, but there's no telling how much.

    As far as the quarterbacks: Hasselbeck's QB rating was almost 10 points higher last year than any other in his career. So either it was a breakout year or an anomaly. Last year Hasselbeck's YPA, TD:INT ratio, and percentage were all career highs...and Bulger's YPA and percentage were still better. In the past that has been about what you could expect from the two; Hasselbeck puts up less INTs versus TDs compared to Bulger, but Bulger completes a better percentage and gets more yardage per throw. I'm pretty sure I recall statements this offseason about how Bulger was supposed to be putting some more muscle on those shoulders. Personally, I'd take Bulger over Hasselbeck. If there's an injury, though, I'd feel a lot more confident with Frerotte behind center than Seneca Wallace. Heck, I might even take Antwaan Randle El over Wallace.


  2. #32
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    18,908
    Rep Power
    147

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OrlandoPaceIsMyHero
    I say it's close to equal (keep in mind that bulger has better WRs and a better system for passing during the martz days)
    As well as a worse offensive line, worse personnel at the tight end position, a less productive running game, and less overall offensive balance in the playcalling.

    Y'know, since we're keeping things in mind.


    Quote Originally Posted by OrlandoPaceIsMyHero
    Hasselbeck won the 2004 QB competition, while Bulger came in something near last
    I'm going to pretend that you didn't just bring up the 2004 Quarterback Competition in this argument, and I think by the time this thread is dead and buried, you're going to want to pretend you didn't as well.

  3. #33
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,000
    Rep Power
    164

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

    Bulger vs. Hasselbeck...

    Here are their average games, statistically speaking, over their careers. Without looking it up, try to guess which is which:

    QB#1
    32.4 attempts
    19.7 completions
    234.2 yards
    1.2 TDs
    0.8 Ints

    QB#2
    34.5 attempts
    22.4 completions
    271.2 yards
    1.6 TDs
    1.2 Ints

    It should be pretty obvious who is who, but the more important point is this - can you honestly say that one of those two QBs is clearly better than the other?

  4. #34
    OrlandoPaceIsMyHero's Avatar
    OrlandoPaceIsMyHero is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Age
    27
    Posts
    73
    Rep Power
    10

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    As well as a worse offensive line, worse personnel at the tight end position, a less productive running game, and less overall offensive balance in the playcalling.
    You are correct in the worse TE and worse running game comments, but that can be balanced against the fact that Bulger had FAR better recievers and a FAR better system for completing lots of passes and putting up incredible numbers (at the cost of sacks - keep reading).

    Bulger did not necessarily have a worse ***PASSBLOCKING*** offensive line. I think Barron and (certainly) Pace are two of the best passblocking tackles in the league, and it honestly isn't that hard to passblock as a guard (seriously, guard doesn't require nearly as much technique and athleticism - as long as you're big and strong enough to go toe to toe with DTs, it's far easier, because the pit is so congested that there is no room for the DTs or LBs to juke you out... since that isn't so hard, the tough thing is picking up blitzes, and I think that the aging timmerman and McC were pretty good at that last year because of their tremendous experience).

    Problems did occur in pass pro because ALL WE EVER DID WAS PASS (to non offensive linemen out there - let me tell you firsthand after 6 years in the trenches, the defense knowing that you are going to pass makes all the difference in the world when it comes to pass pro). Therefore, despite the fact that Bulger took more sacks than Hasselbeck last year, that was not the fault of a worse offensive line, but rather the fault of Martz's high-risk, high-reward system where you either get a 30 yd completion or a -7 yd sack/fumble about once every 5 plays. THAT is why Bulger took more sacks than Hasselbeck, and that's also why Bulger had better passing stats [considering that Bulger is the type of ice-cold-blooded guy who doesn't let pressure mess up his delivery], despite the bad TE and nonexistant run threat, and with the help of the far better WRs.



    Look, I don't want to argue that Hasselbeck is better than Bulger, seeing as watching/listening to Matt Hasselbeck makes me want to vomit (he's such an arrogant brat, and he's bald, and he plays for my second least favorite NFL team). I never said that he was a better QB on the field.

    My argument was that the Seahawks are more likely to be a good team. In comparing QBs, I said:

    Quote Originally Posted by OrlandoPaceIsMyHero
    I think that Hassleback and Bulger are comperable when it comes to throwing a football.
    As that statement does not reflect my current opinion, I'll present a new statement presenting my current opinion on the subject: Ahem,

    NEW STATEMENT!:
    *I think that Bulger is slightly better than Hasselbeck when it comes to throwing a football.*

    Now, with that in mind, I believe that the remainder of my argument is still valid. If I want to win more games than the other team, I will take a slightly worse QB (Hasselbeck) who will not get hurt at the drop of a pin (or, in NFL terms, the crushing tackle of a 275 lb defensive end running a 4.5 40, power cleaning 400 lbs, vertical jumping 40 inches) because he has the physique of a (sorry Marc - I still love you bro) 15 year old JV linebacker.

    As far as this,
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    I'm going to pretend that you didn't just bring up the 2004 Quarterback Competition in this argument, and I think by the time this thread is dead and buried, you're going to want to pretend you didn't as well.
    you are correct. That attempt at an argument is turning into a "Howard Dean Scream" type of ... miscalculation ... that is bringing down the rest of my argument and casuing the entire piece to be regarded harshly.


    All I'm arguing is that (personalities aside! All I want to do is WIN LOTS OF GAMES HERE) I would rather have Matt H. as my QB than Marc B. because at least Matt will be there for all (or most) of my 16 game season. Marc will probably be better for the games that he does play in, but it's usually a big drop down to #2.



    Sidenote, which sort of applies: I can't believe that the Hawks didn't pick up a good backup QB. Seneca -I'm-a-reciever-playing-quarterback- Wallace will be a disaster if they have to use him. If Matt H. goes down, the Seahawks are DONE.


    -OPIMH

    P.S. It's far more entertaining to write a really long editorial like this than to actually do the work that I am supposed to do! Hooray for football message boards and preseason speculation!

  5. #35
    OrlandoPaceIsMyHero's Avatar
    OrlandoPaceIsMyHero is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Age
    27
    Posts
    73
    Rep Power
    10

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

    I agree with Avenger, aside from the fact that QB2 has alot more attempts (making me 95% sure that he's Bulger), these numbers are essentially identical:

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam

    QB#1
    32.4 attempts
    19.7 completions
    234.2 yards
    1.2 TDs
    0.8 Ints
    That's a 60.8% completion percentage and a 1.5 TD:INT ratio (1.5 TDs for every 1 INT).

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    QB#2
    34.5 attempts
    22.4 completions
    271.2 yards
    1.6 TDs
    1.2 Ints
    64.9% completion percentage, 1.3 TD:INT ratio.

    The completion percentages are essentially exactly the same (does anyone notice the a difference of 4.1% completions? You're telling me that you will notice one more completion out of every TWENTY FIVE? If I knew anything about statistics I could probably run some test to prove that the difference is not statistically significant.

    The TD:INT ratio is pretty close too (13% different...), and it could easily be altered drastically by one guy getting thrown into the fire early in his career while the other got the chance to sit back and learn, or by one guy being on a bad team where they had to try alot of desperation stuff in the 4th quarter that resulted in alot of INTs.

  6. #36
    sprtsmac's Avatar
    sprtsmac is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Age
    42
    Posts
    597
    Rep Power
    13

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

    [QUOTE=OrlandoPaceIsMyHero]
    If I want to win more games than the other team, I will take a slightly worse QB (Hasselbeck) who will not get hurt at the drop of a pin (or, in NFL terms, the crushing tackle of a 275 lb defensive end running a 4.5 40, power cleaning 400 lbs, vertical jumping 40 inches) because he has the physique of a (sorry Marc - I still love you bro) 15 year old JV linebacker.
    QUOTE]

    You keep on mentioning how injury proned Bulger is; well I will give you that he has been injured more than Hasselbeck and he has not completed a season the last 2 years. But how about giving him some credit. Bulger is considered one of the toughest QB's in the league as he takes more of a pounding than any other QB in the league because of the type of offense that Martz ran. Would Hasselbeck have been able to stay healthy if he took as many hits as Bulger? Who knows. But I will say this...if Bulger gets the type of protection that Hasselbeck gets he will stay healthy, play all the games and have a Pro Bowl year.
    Sprtsmac :football:

  7. #37
    bubbaramfan's Avatar
    bubbaramfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    California
    Age
    59
    Posts
    37
    Rep Power
    0

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

    I think the answer to this is Depth of the bench. Head to head, the rams are as good as the Hawks on both sides of the ball, but after the 1st unit, the level of play falls off alot more on the Rams. The Hawks have players that can come off the bench and they don't lose much in skill level. The Rams have a bigger drop off. A good expample would be at safety. After C Chavous and Otogwe (who in my opinion is a 3rd stringer on any other team) Who are the backups? the level of skill goes way down. This is where the Rams, with smart drafting as they did this year will return to the playoffs yearly. The Hawks have better skill players on thier 2nd and 3rd units. Right now, thats the difference. I think the new coaching staff is a better mix of coachs for coaching up young players than what Martz had. But its going to take a couple years to bring the skill level of the 2nd and 3rd units to Make the Rams real playoff contenders. Face it, the Rams are in a rebuilding mode. Its going to be fun to watch, as this team has some good youg players, and a good coaching staff.

  8. #38
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    18,908
    Rep Power
    147

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OrlandoPaceIsMyHero
    Therefore, despite the fact that Bulger took more sacks than Hasselbeck last year, that was not the fault of a worse offensive line
    Sorry man, but you're not going to convince me that all the pass protection problems were simply the result of passing so much and not also the result of the personnel on the field. There's a reason we now have a new starter at left guard and two of our other veteran interior starters have been put on notice that their jobs aren't secure. Yes, passing so much and so often does mean you're going to get sacked more. But just from watching the game, you could see the protection break downs occuring. The Seattle offensive line definitely wins the contest in run blocking, and I just don't see how you can give the Rams an even grade in pass protection, all things considered.

  9. #39
    TDubDawg is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    3
    Rep Power
    0

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

    Thanks for the laughs guys, I've enjoyed it.

    First of all, Bulger has never played a full season, and if your qb cant stay healthy, you are only as good as you backup. matt hasselbeck on his own has your qb position beaten.

    Second, Jackson has not had a season in his career where he came within a hundred yards of shauns worst rushing season. these two players are not on the same level, and jackson will never be good enough to be associated with shaun.

    Third, yeah youre number one reciever beats our number one. but we go essentially 5 deep (djack, burleson, engram, hackett, warrick) with reliable and explosive WCO recievers that are able to contribute and play. We dont just have one great reciever, one oldie and one tot.

    Fourth, you're OL is nowhere near as powerful as seattles. Seattles consistently blocks for a top 3 back and blocks for a probowl qb. You say you have a better passblcoking line, yet you blame bulgers' inferiority to matt on the fact that marks line gives up so many more sacks. Shouldnt the better passblocking line be giving up LESS sacks?

    Fifth, our defensive line was dominating last season. We had no one double-digit sack guy, but everybody in the rotation contributed to that 50+ sack season. Wistrom didnt have big sack numbers, but he was playing injured all year, not to mention that he demanded more attention from the offensive lines, freeing up the otehr guys for more sacks on the qb. we added a few guys for depth on the inside, as well as more experience to the young marcus tubbs, and we drafted a passrusher in Tapp whos been getting rave reviews from..well...everybody

    Sixth, your linebackers shroud in comparison to our top 3. Tatupu, as a rookie, was the captain of the defense, moving the defensive line guys into position to better stop the run. He played coverage outstanding, with 4 interceptions and 6 passes defended, oh and he got 4 sacks as well. He led the team in tackles and was near the ball on every play, on his way to the probowl. Hill, a starter for only half the season, ended with 7 and a half sacks ad 51 solo tackles. Add to that allpro julian peterson, who is now completely healed and ready for another outstanding season. You should see the guy in camp, hes a beast. not only will he help the run defense, but hes able to line up as a rush end or play the nickleback and drp into coverage.

    Our secondary is the main area of concern. We DO have the best young safety tandem in the league with hamlin and boulware, and im hoping jennings gets the start opposite trufant so herndon doesnt have to be in except on nickle situations, but this could very well end up being anotehr strength of the team. The dominant pass rush makes the secondary look very good, and we have done nothing but shore up the pass rush some more.


    dont get me wrong, i respect your team for the games they have pounded us in, but you will not be doing that this year. just hope to not finish last in the nfc west, because you wont compete with the seahawks.

  10. #40
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    59

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

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbaramfan
    I think the answer to this is Depth of the bench. Head to head, the rams are as good as the Hawks on both sides of the ball, but after the 1st unit, the level of play falls off alot more on the Rams. The Hawks have players that can come off the bench and they don't lose much in skill level. The Rams have a bigger drop off.
    I couldn't disagree more.

    Backup QB: Wallace vs. Frerotte - Advantage Rams
    3rd-5th receiver: Engram/Burleson?, Warrick, and Hackett vs. Curtis, McDonald, and Looker - Advantage Rams
    Backup RB: Morris and Scobey vs. Williams and Fisher - Tough call. Morris beats Williams, but Fisher beats Scobey
    Backup OL: Ashworth/Womack, Spencer, Henry, Ross, Sims vs. Steussie, Incognito/Terrell, Sapaia, Setterstrom? Palmer? - Push? Steussie and Ashworth are both former starters possibly moving to guard, Spencer's a first round pick and Incognito has first round talent, and most the rest of the backups on both teams are first or second year players who have never played a down
    Backup UT: Tubbs vs. Wroten - Advantage Seahawks
    Backup NT: Terrill vs. Fisk - Advantage Rams
    Backup DEs: Tafoy and Tapp vs. Green and Adeyanju - Advantage Rams
    Backup LB: Bentley, Lewis, and Koutovides vs. Coakley, Faulk, and Smith - Advantage Rams
    Backup S: Michael Green and Shaunard Harts vs. Carter, Alston, and Bartell - Advantage Seahawks
    Backup CB: Kelly Jennings and Jimmy Williams (not the 2006 draft pick) vs. 2 out of Fisher/Brown/Butler/Hill - Advantage Rams

    With all the competition for starting spots on the Rams roster, I'd say the talent level of our backups will be much closer.

    [Edit: typo]
    Last edited by Goldenfleece; -08-03-2006 at 11:50 PM.

  11. #41
    Zero Cool is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Age
    25
    Posts
    33
    Rep Power
    0

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

    i think bulger can put us other the top against seattle, if our defense can hold them, which i doubt.

  12. #42
    Return To Glory's Avatar
    Return To Glory is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    St.Louis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    79
    Rep Power
    0

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

    the one with 1.2 picks is Bulger, I know because he likes to throw picks, not all the time but he does average atleast 1 pick every two games.

  13. #43
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Here
    Age
    41
    Posts
    3,374
    Rep Power
    46

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TDubDawg
    Thanks for the laughs guys, I've enjoyed it.

    First of all, Bulger has never played a full season, and if your qb cant stay healthy, you are only as good as you backup. matt hasselbeck on his own has your qb position beaten.

    Second, Jackson has not had a season in his career where he came within a hundred yards of shauns worst rushing season. these two players are not on the same level, and jackson will never be good enough to be associated with shaun.

    Third, yeah youre number one reciever beats our number one. but we go essentially 5 deep (djack, burleson, engram, hackett, warrick) with reliable and explosive WCO recievers that are able to contribute and play. We dont just have one great reciever, one oldie and one tot.

    Fourth, you're OL is nowhere near as powerful as seattles. Seattles consistently blocks for a top 3 back and blocks for a probowl qb. You say you have a better passblcoking line, yet you blame bulgers' inferiority to matt on the fact that marks line gives up so many more sacks. Shouldnt the better passblocking line be giving up LESS sacks?

    Fifth, our defensive line was dominating last season. We had no one double-digit sack guy, but everybody in the rotation contributed to that 50+ sack season. Wistrom didnt have big sack numbers, but he was playing injured all year, not to mention that he demanded more attention from the offensive lines, freeing up the otehr guys for more sacks on the qb. we added a few guys for depth on the inside, as well as more experience to the young marcus tubbs, and we drafted a passrusher in Tapp whos been getting rave reviews from..well...everybody

    Sixth, your linebackers shroud in comparison to our top 3. Tatupu, as a rookie, was the captain of the defense, moving the defensive line guys into position to better stop the run. He played coverage outstanding, with 4 interceptions and 6 passes defended, oh and he got 4 sacks as well. He led the team in tackles and was near the ball on every play, on his way to the probowl. Hill, a starter for only half the season, ended with 7 and a half sacks ad 51 solo tackles. Add to that allpro julian peterson, who is now completely healed and ready for another outstanding season. You should see the guy in camp, hes a beast. not only will he help the run defense, but hes able to line up as a rush end or play the nickleback and drp into coverage.

    Our secondary is the main area of concern. We DO have the best young safety tandem in the league with hamlin and boulware, and im hoping jennings gets the start opposite trufant so herndon doesnt have to be in except on nickle situations, but this could very well end up being anotehr strength of the team. The dominant pass rush makes the secondary look very good, and we have done nothing but shore up the pass rush some more.


    dont get me wrong, i respect your team for the games they have pounded us in, but you will not be doing that this year. just hope to not finish last in the nfc west, because you wont compete with the seahawks.
    I'm not going to go through all this and point out the comedy in this post, Goldenfleece already did a nice job.

    Oh and thanks for the laugh.
    Quote Originally Posted by RealRam
    What next, NFL gay players kissing on the mouth. To me it is S.O.S.: simply/obscene/sickening. Rest assured I will never cheer for a known homo player

  14. #44
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,000
    Rep Power
    164

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TDubDawg
    Thanks for the laughs guys, I've enjoyed it.

    First of all, Bulger has never played a full season, and if your qb cant stay healthy, you are only as good as you backup. matt hasselbeck on his own has your qb position beaten.
    Actually, in 2003 and 2004 Bulger missed a combined 3 games. Hardly indicative of a QB who can't make it through a season. As the stats I posted above show (Bulger was QB#2) the two are clearly comparable.

    Second, Jackson has not had a season in his career where he came within a hundred yards of shauns worst rushing season. these two players are not on the same level, and jackson will never be good enough to be associated with shaun.
    This is a good example of what I like to call "lying with facts." Here's a more relevant stat for you. Alexander's first two years: 1,631 yards rushing. Jackson's first two years: 1,719 yards rushing.

    The real point here is that Jackson is a young player who hasn't hit his stride yet, while Alexander is closing in on the dreaded 30 mark. If you don't think a productive back can have a sharp decline when he gets older, take a look at Marshall Faulk, Curtis Martin and Priest Holmes. Either the body breaks down or age just catches up with a RB.

    Third, yeah youre number one reciever beats our number one. but we go essentially 5 deep (djack, burleson, engram, hackett, warrick) with reliable and explosive WCO recievers that are able to contribute and play. We dont just have one great reciever, one oldie and one tot.
    Here's where your argument just gets silly. Holt is not just better than Jackson (who, by the way, was recently on the PUP list), he's FAR superior. As for Bruce vs. Burleson - I'd still take Ike in a heartbeat. Curtis (the "tot," I guess) is arguably the best #3 WR in the league. Shaun McDonald (remember him?) is better than Hackett or Worrick.

    Fourth, you're OL is nowhere near as powerful as seattles. Seattles consistently blocks for a top 3 back and blocks for a probowl qb. You say you have a better passblcoking line, yet you blame bulgers' inferiority to matt on the fact that marks line gives up so many more sacks. Shouldnt the better passblocking line be giving up LESS sacks?
    We'll see how Seattle's line does without Hutchinson (I love how Hawk fans act like losing a Pro Bowl OG is no big deal). As for the pass blocking, the Rams throw the ball more and use a lot more 4 WR sets, so its hard to make a comparison based solely on the total number of sacks.

    Fifth, our defensive line was dominating last season. We had no one double-digit sack guy, but everybody in the rotation contributed to that 50+ sack season. Wistrom didnt have big sack numbers, but he was playing injured all year, not to mention that he demanded more attention from the offensive lines, freeing up the otehr guys for more sacks on the qb. we added a few guys for depth on the inside, as well as more experience to the young marcus tubbs, and we drafted a passrusher in Tapp whos been getting rave reviews from..well...everybody
    Dominating? I don't know about that. They sure didn't look dominating against the Steelers. As for the Rams - they will have at least one new starter (Glover) and also have a rookie who's getting rave reviews, as if that matters (Wroten). We'll see.

    Sixth, your linebackers shroud in comparison to our top 3. Tatupu, as a rookie, was the captain of the defense, moving the defensive line guys into position to better stop the run. He played coverage outstanding, with 4 interceptions and 6 passes defended, oh and he got 4 sacks as well. He led the team in tackles and was near the ball on every play, on his way to the probowl. Hill, a starter for only half the season, ended with 7 and a half sacks ad 51 solo tackles. Add to that allpro julian peterson, who is now completely healed and ready for another outstanding season. You should see the guy in camp, hes a beast. not only will he help the run defense, but hes able to line up as a rush end or play the nickleback and drp into coverage.
    Seattle has a very good LB corps, no doubt. That said, the Rams acquired Witherspoon, who should be a big improvement.

    Our secondary is the main area of concern. We DO have the best young safety tandem in the league with hamlin and boulware, and im hoping jennings gets the start opposite trufant so herndon doesnt have to be in except on nickle situations, but this could very well end up being anotehr strength of the team. The dominant pass rush makes the secondary look very good, and we have done nothing but shore up the pass rush some more.
    Maybe you should wait and see if Hamlin can even play again after the head injury before you proclaim him part of the best safety tandem in the league. Its nice that you have such high hopes for Jennings, but I've seen him play a lot (I'm a UM Law alum) and I can tell you - he's no Tye Hill.

    dont get me wrong, i respect your team for the games they have pounded us in, but you will not be doing that this year. just hope to not finish last in the nfc west, because you wont compete with the seahawks.
    Your argument, though heartfelt, is uncompelling.

  15. #45
    TDubDawg is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    3
    Rep Power
    0

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

    "This is a good example of what I like to call "lying with facts." Here's a more relevant stat for you. Alexander's first two years: 1,631 yards rushing. Jackson's first two years: 1,719 yards rushing." Shaun was a backup his first year

    "The real point here is that Jackson is a young player who hasn't hit his stride yet, while Alexander is closing in on the dreaded 30 mark. If you don't think a productive back can have a sharp decline when he gets older, take a look at Marshall Faulk, Curtis Martin and Priest Holmes. Either the body breaks down or age just catches up with a RB." Shaun isnt a normal runningback. he has saved his body by avoiding hits. this is the reason he is considered soft. go look at gamefilm.

    "Here's where your argument just gets silly. Holt is not just better than Jackson (who, by the way, was recently on the PUP list), he's FAR superior. As for Bruce vs. Burleson - I'd still take Ike in a heartbeat. Curtis (the "tot," I guess) is arguably the best #3 WR in the league. Shaun McDonald (remember him?) is better than Hackett or Worrick. " Give me some stats to prove this. I agree holt is alot better, but isaac is OLD and inneffective, as well as injury prone. while burleson is young and explosive. engram has always been reliable, but i would certainly take curtis over him. hackett is the best reciever with under 50 receptions last year.

    "We'll see how Seattle's line does without Hutchinson (I love how Hawk fans act like losing a Pro Bowl OG is no big deal). As for the pass blocking, the Rams throw the ball more and use a lot more 4 WR sets, so its hard to make a comparison based solely on the total number of sacks." Any half-assed guard you stick in between an all-pro tackle and probowl center is going to be fine.

    "Dominating? I don't know about that. They sure didn't look dominating against the Steelers. As for the Rams - they will have at least one new starter (Glover) and also have a rookie who's getting rave reviews, as if that matters (Wroten). We'll see." laroi is going into his eleventh season in the league, good luck plugging up holes with a dinosaur.

    "Seattle has a very good LB corps, no doubt. That said, the Rams acquired Witherspoon, who should be a big improvement." Will is an improvement, but to say your linebacking core is comparable to ours is laughable

    "Maybe you should wait and see if Hamlin can even play again after the head injury before you proclaim him part of the best safety tandem in the league. Its nice that you have such high hopes for Jennings, but I've seen him play a lot (I'm a UM Law alum) and I can tell you - he's no Tye Hill." Hes been playing fullcontact in camp and is fine. As for jennings, ive seen him play too and he seems fine to me. a fine backup or starter, even as a rookie

    "Your argument, though heartfelt, is uncompelling."

    and yours is ludicrous




    no, please go through and explain it to me. i wanna hear your guys' explanations on why you think some of these things...

    "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?"

    "We have a better pass-blocking OL even though our line gives u more sacks and that is why Bulger is better than Matt."




    Please, just give me some stat, some evidence that any of your positions, besides MAYBE wide reciever will be better than seattle. Besides sounding like big homers in this and another thread on this board, you have failed to give anything but "ifs" as reasons why "jackson will close the gap with alexander," or "the lb groups are comparable."

    Your team is a group of question marks at this point. Your oline, besides pace, has proven to be unreliable. Your qb gets injured putting deoderant on in the morning. Your runningback only eclipsed the 100yard mark twice last season, after numerous promises of big stats. You have one reciever that is good for 90 catches. Your TE situation continues to look bad, with no proven starter. Your DL couldnt stop the run last year, and couldnt rush the qb. You failed to upgrade that position, but with the aging La'Roi glover, now coming into his eleventh season i believe. You say the linebacking cores are comparable. i doubt that, see my previous post for reasoning
    Last edited by TDubDawg; -08-04-2006 at 12:31 AM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 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
  •