Travis Fisher

[BET81BILL]

Originally Posted by RamsFan16

Good point on the picture, and exactly right RealRam and radjohns, Nick, now I know your as smart as they come, and probrably one of the if not smartest person I know. But this (in my picture) is the Touchdown that you said was a Perfect pass and was perfect coverage on Fisher, but if you look (and I know it s apicture, and it could have looked diffrently) but it could have been prevented, as in the touchdown if Travis Fisher would locate the ball rather than depend on the reciever dropping it.

Ron bartell is the future and the future is now

[ramsbruce]

Originally Posted by RamsFan16

I know Cornerbacks don't do it every play, but they attempt alot, and Fisher doesn't attempt to do it ANY play.

You really paint yourself into a corner when you say he doesn't attempt to do it on "ANY" play. You don't really believe that Fisher has never attempted to turn and look for the ball ever do you?

As a sidenote, I'm enjoying reading this thread and peoples views.

[RamsFan16]

The only time Fisher looks for the ball is when (almost every pass to him) he is playing 10 yards off the reciever and its thrown to him, he then makes sure the reciever has the ball and he can 'attempt' to make th etackle.

[RealRam]

Does it actually need explanation, Nick? :x Not logical enough for you? --RealRam

I wouldn't have asked if it didn't. You can PM me if you'd rather not explain it in this thread. --Nick

Forget it, Nikc. To me, it's not worth P.M.ing you. I suspect you know what I meant. You just don't seem to admit being wrong on any given subject, whether on discussing Travis Fisher's shortcomings as one of our Rams CBs, particularly after Sunday's game, or ... whatever!

Thus the proverb cited. I thought that would have been more than eloquent.

[ramsbruce]

Originally Posted by RamsFan16

The only time Fisher looks for the ball is when (almost every pass to him) he is playing 10 yards off the reciever and its thrown to him, he then makes sure the reciever has the ball and he can 'attempt' to make th etackle.

Ok good, I'm glad you agree that Fisher has attempted to look back for the ball at various times in his career.

[tanus]

so are you guys going to come up with any examples cuz right now nick is kicking all of your asses, especially the ones that dont understand man coverage.

[Nick]

Originally Posted by RamsFan16

The only time Fisher looks for the ball is when (almost every pass to him) he is playing 10 yards off the reciever and its thrown to him, he then makes sure the reciever has the ball and he can 'attempt' to make th etackle.

Again, that's not correct based on previous play. Go back and look at the Green Bay example I cited. He's right with Donald Driver, not ten yards off of him. Travis looks for the pass and deflects it to prevent the catch. He doesn't wait until after the catch to then make a tackle.

Originally Posted by RealRam

You just don't seem to admit being wrong on any given subject, whether on discussing Travis Fisher's shortcomings as one of our Rams CBs, particularly after Sunday's game, or ... whatever!

Wait, what? I won't admit to being wrong? At what point in this discussion did the jury rule that I was incorrect, case closed?

I asked for examples to convince me that I was wrong about Fisher, and have received a grand total of two - one I agreed with, the other I disputed with a very detailed analysis explaining why.

If you want me to admit I'm wrong about Fisher's play, provie it to me by countering the points I've made and by providing examples to support your opinion.

Making a claim about his play and then criticizing me for countering your claim rather than simply rolling over in defeat doesn't strike me as a very convincing argument.

If you want someone to change their opinion about something, you sort of have to convince them to do so.

[UtterBlitz]

I wish I had more than this Nick, but it makes me sick to my stomach to watch him play. I would have to go back and watch film to break it down for you. You can talk better football then me anyday and I don't really know the answers that you want to hear.

Right now I don't have the time to do it. Perhaps I will be able to respond to your article when you post that.

[mh-i]

Fisher is a liability. The Rams D is still a work in progress and in the end he'll be gone. The Rams really need a shut down corner.

[Nick]

Originally Posted by mh-i

Fisher is a liability.

Will you then accept my challenge and show me how? Examples across the six games we've played so far of Fisher playing poorly and being a liability?

Originally Posted by UtterBlitz

I wish I had more than this Nick, but it makes me sick to my stomach to watch him play.

Well, what makes me sick to my stomach Utter is when the Rams cannot get pressure on the opposing quarterback and he has all day to throw the football.

Look at some of the quarterbacks we've faced - Jake Plummer, Kurt Warner, Brett Favre, Matt Hasselbeck. When you give these guys all day to throw, they're going to tear defenses apart because they're (generally) talented, smart players. Heck, even Alex Smith was able to throw effectively against us when we couldn't get to him! In order to keep them from being efficient, we have to get pressure on them and rattle their cages.

That's why some of us (Fat Pang, Av, GC, myself) have been emphasizing the importance of pressure on a quarterback. When you rush a QB into making a decision and making a quick throw, it often times is not as good or as accurate as he'd like it to be or as it needs to be, thus increasing the liklihood of a mistake and helping your secondary out.

One needs only look back as recently as the Bears/Cardinals game last night. Prior to this game, Rex Grossman was enjoying a great season, boasting a QB rating of 100.8 through five games. He was even entertaining some league MVP talk. But what did the Cardinals do? They were able to get consistent pressure on him and force him to make bad decisions and rush his throws, resulting in four interceptions and a completion percentage of 37.8%.

Now we know from experience that Arizona's defense isn't exactly amazing. Bulger put up some pretty good numers against them, and prior to last night's four interception performance, they'd only grabbed three interceptions through the previous five games. But when you're able to get a quarterback out of his comfort zone and make him rush things, he becomes less accurate, less decisive, and it goes a long way toward helping your secondary.

There are eleven players on the field when we line up to play defense, and ALL of them are important on every down. The role of the four defensive linemen up front should not be forgotten or minimalized when talking about how to effectively disrupt an opponent's passing game. Something to think about, perhaps.

I look forward to your additional thoughts on this topic.

[RealRam]

Wait, what? I won't admit to being wrong? At what point in this discussion did the jury rule that I was incorrect, case closed? -- Nick

Nick, it's not so much about being 'exactly wrong' or 'exactly right' but rather, the inflexibilty or dare I say, intransigence, an almost impossible intransigence in discussing matters with you.

BTW, this Travis Fisher thread is just another example.

Oh sure, you gather facts-a-plenty, facts-a-plenty alright! And then, of someone with a directly opposite view you demand "examples" (check that, "specific examples") to support their argument and to "prove" you wrong.

Well, as UtterBlitz just mentioned, often one does simply not have the time to "prove you wrong" with "specific examples" or other divers research. Besides, that is not the objective, to have to convince you one way or the other, looking for evidence, going to court, etc. x3.

Being factual is always helpful but seldomly sufficient.

There's more to it, as in ... the spirit of the law in light of the law itself.

There are other views and considerations that are not so cut and dry, especially when the authors of these views and considerations attempt to translate their feelings into an opinion within a public forum. Fortunately for many of us Rams fans this great ClanRam forum truly functions as a little but ... oh!, so important nitche of entertainment, and as a server, a switchboard to share among fellow fans our passion for the Rams.

Most of the time, anyway. Until running into the moral of Proverbs 17:12*.

Nevertheless, here's another fact for you: I will no longer discuss with you anything on Rams CB Travis Fisher. [Facts are by nature usually not in the future but the future will soon support this fact].


*. On 2nd thought, perhaps it behooves us all to explain the saying (paraphrased):

Better to meet a bear robbed of her cubs
than a fool in his folly. -- Prov. 17:12

1. It is better for one to confront a mother bear whose cubs have just been stolen than to meet a stubborn person ranting about his/her ways.

2. You're better off fighting a mad bear whose cubs have just been stolen than to argue with a person engrossed in his/her stubborness (i.e., their never ending blabber of 'ifs, ands, or buts').

[UtterBlitz]

Nick, I completely agree that more pressure on the QB from the line and the linebackers would disrupt their passing game. You would see more hurried passes, more incomplete passes, and poorly thrown balls. A pass russ would indeed help hide the poor performances by the cornerbacks.

All though this is a valid and good point, it does not take away from the fact that Fisher is not performing well. He plays way off his man. He hs the speed to stay with his coverage assignment, but he seldom breaks on the ball, or even turns to play the ball instead of the player. He draws a lot of pass interference penalties. I am really tired of seeing him hanging around after a big play has been made by the other team. I wish he would at least put a good hit on the receiver to see if he could jar the ball loose after they catch it. Either go for the ball, or make a hit, but don't just run next to the receiver looking helpless.

I wish we would see a better pass rush and I wish we would see Bartell or Butler in place of Fisher.

[laram0]

This is a great thread and debate. The area of concern for me is that we are lead to believe that a defensive back has tunnel vision. EX: Fisher has 1 of 2 choices, either keep his eyes on the receiver or turn his head and look for the ball. I disagree with this. A quality defensive back can do both at the same time. Read and react, Read and react.

Like a Jim Edmonds racing back to catch a fly ball. He spots the ball then looks for the wall then relocates the ball......etc.

What's it called....Head on a swivel.

[ramsbruce]

Originally Posted by laram0

This is a great thread and debate. The area of concern for me is that we are lead to believe that a defensive back has tunnel vision. EX: Fisher has 1 of 2 choices, either keep his eyes on the receiver or turn his head and look for the ball. I disagree with this. A quality defensive back can do both at the same time. Read and react, Read and react.

Like a Jim Edmonds racing back to catch a fly ball. He spots the ball then looks for the wall then relocates the ball......etc.

What's it called....Head on a swivel.

The football is in the air and the baseball is in the air, but there's one big difference though, the wall at the baseball park doesn't move, but the player the DB is covering does move.

[laram0]

Originally Posted by ramsbruce

The football is in the air and the baseball is in the air, but there's one big difference though, the wall at the baseball park doesn't move, but the player the DB is covering does move.

Yeah so does a db's head and eyes.....