JavaScript must be enabled to use this chat software. Anti-Seahawk - Page 3

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Anti-Seahawk

  1. #31
    Milan Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by DanS761
    Meant nothing? How do you know since they didnt play? How do you know if all of Indy's starters were playing? You dont know because they didnt play. You can assume all you want, but assuming things doesnt prove facts.

    Seahawks are on a 11 game winning streak, we should be 14-1 if JB made the field goal(no excuses though) and you rams fans are so bitter about being 3rd in the NFC west, that you have to downplay or manipulate something against the seahawks. A year ago you guys were on top of the world, and the hawks down in the dumps. you CANT STAND the fact that the hawks are so rediculously good, and you are 5-10. it KILLS YOU! bottom line..........

    So you bring up Hamiln and Sharper as people you didn't have for the game, yet you keep bringing up the 13-2 statement, which they hardly helped you to get. Aside from that even in the games that they have played, none did anything special, in 6 games All Hamlin got was tackles and 2 PDs, in 8 Games all Sharper got was Tackles.

  2. #32
    jkramsfan Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    what the hell is the difference,the colts didnt need to win and really the hawks didnt either,i would like to see them meet in the big game and may the best team win when it counts.

  3. #33
    RamsFanSam's Avatar
    RamsFanSam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Springfield, Missouri, United States
    Rep Power

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by akseahawkfan
    Well as long as you're dreaming, you may as well dream big. The Rams will probably better next year, simply because I can't believe that could be this bad two years in a row. But to think that they are going to improve enough in one season to sweep the Seahawks next year is just wishful thinking. It's going to take a number of years of rebuilding for the Rams to be competitive again with a new coaching staff and front office. I think you are looking at a lot of years looking up to the Seahawks in the standings, may as well get used to it now.

    Don't feel bad, this just gives you an early start on your draft board, and no matter who you pick they will probably be better than who you have now.

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
    While you bring up some valid points, I think history is an indication that your opinions may not be correct.

    It wasn't too long ago that the Rams were the crap team of the NFL. They had a 4-12 record, Tony Banks was the QB, and nobody took us seriously.
    Sixteen games later, everyone took the Rams seriously.
    So, as you see, things can change rather quickly.
    While the squaks do look like the real deal this year, things can change quickly there, too. Next year, Seattle may tumble into the cellar. Hasslebeck may be hurt, Alexander might blow out his knee, free agency may take a toll.
    So, saying the Rams may be looking up to the squaks in the standings for a few years isn't even close to a sure thing. If you compare the players, the talent level of the Rams is fairly even with that of Seattle on the offensive side. We may even have the advantage in some positions. Defensively, however, the advantage is clearly to the squaks.
    Of course, with a new HC and assistants coming in to St. Louis in the next couple of weeks, everything will change. Whether or not it will take years, or only one season is still up in the air. Only time will tell.
    As far as the win over the Colts, had tragedy not struck the Dungy family when and how it did, things would have been different. Most of the Indy players knew the coach's son, and it hit them hard. I don't know if you have personally lived through a tragedy like this, but it does take a huge toll on everyone who not only knows the deceased, but even if they only know the family. The Colts were obviously distracted, and not performing at their best.
    Personally, I was looking foward to watching the game until I heard of the death of Dungy's son. It was going to be a really good, competitive game, but Indy obviously was not into it as much as they would have been.
    Congratulations on winning the NFC West. The squaks have worked long and hard to get to this point. But, just a little advice: After next week, things will get a lot tougher. Just because you think you will prevail doesn't necessarily mean you will. All it takes is one missed tackle, one tipped pass, one false start, and the walrus will be watching the Super Bowl from his living room instead of from the sidelines.


  4. #34
    Seahawk_For_Life Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Wow Seahawk For Life you are dellusional. I'm not making any excuses, just the facts. Who was out for the Hawks on offense?????? No one.
    When did I ever bring up the offense?

    Your "available" full strength is much better than what the Colts "available" full strength was, theres no comparison. Let's compare
    When did I say our full strength was worse than their full strength? Again, you read too much into my statements.

    But I like how you are now acknowledging that the Seahawks were not at full strength as well. And that was one of my points in the first place. The fact is both teams were not.

    Colts : June, Diem, Harrison, Freeney (for most of the game), Manning (for some of the game) Wayne (for some of the game) Bob Sanders, Reagor, Simon, Mathis all sat out due to the game not meaning much to the Colts.

    Hawks (According to Dan) : Herndon, Dyson, Darby, and Trufant for 3 quarters. Hass and Alexander in the 4th and if the game were closer Hass and Alexander wouldn't have where as Manning, Wayne, Harrison etc would have sat no matter what.
    We can go over and over the players, how valuable they are to each team, we could go on and on. But the fact is you can never judge it that way. How would you ever come up with a number? Say the Colts were at 80%, and the Hawks at 85%? It's a pointless discussion.

    But from my opening comment, the Hawks were up 14-3 when the Colts started pulling their starters. That's what I feel good about.

    So reality says the Colts were really undermanned, and the Hawks were injury free on offense, and had 3 out on D.
    Spin the numbers any way you want, we really can't get to a resolution on this like I said before.

    Of course you will defend the Hawks, but just be realistic, that wasn't the full strength Colts that you would see in the Superbowl.
    Same for the Hawks. And hopefully the Hawks will be at full strength(or as close as possible, minus Sharper and Hamlin) if we make it to the Super Bowl.

    If you play like you did yesterday you would have a hard time beating the full strength Colts with your full strength Hawks.
    Why? That's completly your opinion, and your view point. People have been saying things like this all year. But the point is we're 13-2, and have the #1 rated offense in points and yardage. And the #4 rated defense in points allowed.

    I think we could be competitive with any team in this league. But of course your entitled to your opinion and spin it any way you want.

  5. #35
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Rep Power

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by Seahawk_For_Life
    When did I ever bring up the offense?
    You didn't, I did. But it's clear that you only want to bring up the D because there were a few out, but not bring up the O because they were 100%. Keep spinning it, you know deep down that was the 2nd string Colts team. Beat them in the Superbowl and then boast about how you beat them with their "real" starters not just twisting the words around saying that Troy Walters is a starter because he started when we all know Harrsion and the others are the real starters. You just want to bring up things that suit the Hawk argument, like Milli is a starter when there is no way you would bench Stevans for Milli this season etc.

    But better yet just win a playoff game.

  6. #36
    BoomGoesTheDynamite! Guest

    Re: Anti-Seahawk

    Quote Originally Posted by LA Rammer
    I can't believe what Indy did in giving up that game. Oh well Manning won't get hurt. Last thing I want is Seattle winning the superbowl. I hope we get a good team next year. Imagine we beat the defending superbowl champs 35-0 and post a division sweep.

    Go Rams!
    Wow, this is a stupid thread started off with a stupid post.

    I don't wish to get into the arguments. I just wanted to point something out to mr rammer. So you are so upset what Indy did, eh? What exactly did Philly do against the Rams last year??? If I remember correctly all sorts of different nfc fans were mad that the Rams got a freebee win that got them into the playoffs. That was much worse than Indy resting guys against seattle who already a spot sewn up themselves. Let's not be hypocritcal in our rabid fandom here.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts