Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Bernie speaks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Bernie speaks

    BernieM wrote:
    i'm so bored with all of the warner worship and selective memories -- excuse me while I yawn again -- but to answer, yet again...and again...and again...

    I encouraged martz to start running the ball around 2000, when it was obvious that they couldn't stop anyone on defense that year and needed to eat some clock. It came up again in 2001 before the playoffs and of course my columns after the 2001 Super Bowl loss were about how Martz needed to run the ball more against the Patrtiots. I'm certain I broached the subject again before now, because Martz and me have gone round and round on it through the years. There's another point of view here; if a team is winning and scoring I don't care how he does it. When a team isn't winning and isn't scoring, then it's time to look at the approach. that's where we are now. and for the umpteenth time, I am not responsible for a reader's reading-comprehension level. I am not responsible for what a reader retains, or chooses to retain, from what I've written through the years.

    Thanks very much.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    While I'm reluctant to continue feeding this bizarre Warner obsession, which has a never-ending cycle, I'll respond:

    Any student of NFL history knows that other so-called damaged goods QBs have revitalized their careers elsewhere.

    The classic example is Jim Plunkett.

    Though he didn't go elsewhere to do so, I saw John Unitas go through more than one cycle of rallying his career from abuse and injuries.

    Heck, I covered a guy who did it -- Neil Lomax. He was so gun shy and worn down physically after the 1985 season, that it took him until 1987 to fully recover, mentally and physically.

    If Kurt makes it back to the elite level to stay for a while, it will be because he's healthy and thus capable of physically doing the job.

    As I have said all along, if his hand is sound, and doesn't flare up, he's fine.

    One thing that clearly has happened in his favor is that he seems much calmer in the pocket now. The time away from getting hit and pounded was beneficial to him.

    As for my credibility -- in general terms -- anyone who thinks that me or any other sports columnist, or sports fan, or human being is right all of the time, please join us in the real world. I've never made that claim, and never will make that claim, that I am always right. And I do not hesitate to admit when I am wrong.

    God forbid I should be as arrogant as some of my critics.

    And in this instance, I consider the source. Some of the Warner fans are hardly objective about this situation. The gentleman who created this thread, for instance, has an e-mail address that basically serves as a tribute to Warner.

    And there's nothing wrong with that -- but at the same time, I always must keep in mind who I am dealing with.

    I understand that some people will dismiss anything I have to say that's remotely negative about an athlete, simply because of their fondness and devotion to that athlete. That's part of the experience of being a fan.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Boxcar,

    This will be an ongoing story. Kurt had a rough opener, then two good games. What some of the Warnerites don't want to recognize is that I've always written about Kurt based on his performance. Except once...I wrote about him before anyone really knew what was there, and I expressed optimism over his ability to step in for Trent Green and do the job. I don't think many folks shared that confidence at the time.

    I will watch the Green Bay game later tonight, when I'm done with my baseball-column duties at Busch. I understand that Favre is hurt. That's a factor in this one. Giants certainly should be able to win it now. The GB defense has been bad this season (for the most part) so I'm surprised that (so far) that NY hasn't exploited the situation. But now I see that the Giants are ahead after a long TD drive....and that they are running the ball very well...and that Kurt has completed a high percentage of passes. Going by the stats, it looks like mostly short stuff. But if that's what it takes to win, that's what you do.


    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Bard (if you see this)....

    Is Kurt showing the mobility today that we saw last week against Cleveland? That's been one of the more interesting things about his play so far this season...he's showing some nimble feet.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Thanks, Mr. Drabowsky, for the report.

    I'll say this about Coughlin and staff: they have done an excellent job of playing to Kurt's strengths, and putting him into position to succeed.

    That is a very well-coached team so far.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Follow ups:

    * Bard: You may be a "warnerite" but you ain't blind, and you try like hell to be objective, which again is why I respect you.

    * Who thought Green Bay would "wipe the floor" with the Giants?
    If people watched the first three weeks of the season, I don't see how they'd make that assumption. Gints have played well, and GB is in decline.

    * There's pressure on Bulger for one reason tonight: the Rams are 1-2 and need a win against an 0-3 team. That's the only reason there's pressure on him and the entire team.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    On Cardinals running against the Saints for 200+ yards.
    BernieM wrote:
    Hey, but Fast & Furious is what we do...



    Cheers,
    Bernie

    On that arthritic hand on the washed up #13.
    BernieM wrote:
    Looks good, actually.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

Related Topics

Collapse

  • RamWraith
    A bunch of Bernie posts
    by RamWraith
    Work done by RubbersSoul


    BernieM wrote:
    In today's column I mentioned Warner's legacy -- that he made all of those gloomy football seasons in St. Louis disappear, and replaced them with precious moments and memories.

    In the short term, he has another legacy: the Rams' starting QB in the next few years will be held to a preposterous standard. No question, Bulger needs to play better. As I wrote in here from minicamp, his arm on the deep balls remains weak and I get ticked off just watching it.

    But overall, Bulger is at about where he should be (and he's pretty good) for a QB still finding his way in this league. But because Warner played at such unbelievable heights from 1999-2001, Bulger will be measured against that. Is that fair? Probably doesn't matter -- it's sports. It's just the way it is. Ironically, even Warner fell short -- way short -- of meeting those standards himself, once the injuries took their toll. Warner wasn't Warner, either....and yet some demand that Bulger be the Warner of 1999, 2000 and 2001. Kind of silly if you ask me. Ain't gonna happen. So Bulger should be judged on his own merits.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:

    You're right; Martz does "spin" on Warner.

    It's been a long time since Martz and Warner had a truly good relationship, so I always discount MM's warm and fuzzy comments about Kurt.

    Bottom line is, it all started to fall apart when Kurt's hand became something he couldn't overcome. It started the domino effect. If Warner could still throw it consistently like he once did, and if he could get settled in the pocket again without freaking, none of this would have happened. The Rams and Martz invested a ton of money in Kurt and had no reason to want him to fail. By going this way, they've got millions invested in two QBs, Warner and Bulger, and that hurts their cap.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Bulger is capable of throwing the deep pass. We saw it in 2002. It frustrates me to see him sputter in this area. I think it's in his head. He's thinking too much about technique instead of letting it rip.

    In another follow up, as I've said many times, Bulger needs to play better. Cut down on mistakes, most of all.

    But only a fool would expect him to play as well as Warner did from 1999-2001.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    It isn't a matter of Kurt's hand being healed.
    It will never be healed, really. Not in the traditional sense.
    That's because the problem -- as I continually write -- is an arthritic-like condition in his right thumb. That never heals. It's just a question of when it flares up, and how it limits him when it does flare up. Some days, his grip is fine. Other days, it isn't.

    I dig the Martz bashing on this...
    -06-04-2004, 09:47 AM
  • RamWraith
    The Bernie bits
    by RamWraith
    BernieM wrote:
    I don't care if Marshall Faulk talks to the media.
    I don't care if any athlete talks to the media.
    It does not impact my job in any way ... if anything it makes it easier.

    In Marshall's case, he's sour because of the praise directed at Jackson and the comments being made that he's lost speed and is on the downside of his career. Which is true in both cases, though as I've said many times, he still can be effective in spots, and he was certainly that against Seattle. But here's the irony: he always tells the network people (the crew doing yesterday's game) that it's now his role to help Jackson and help the offense by doing what he can...and that he accepts a secondary role if that's the reality....but when a STL radio, TV or newspaper guy says the same thing -- Jackson was deserving of more playing time, and Marshall has lost some quicks, and that his knees haven't held up -- he gets offended. Pretty funny.

    Even funnier is reading on here the posts like "good for Marshall" and "screw the media." Again, my paycheck doesn't change by one cent if Marshall Faulk declines to speak to me or anyone else. But when he declines to speak to us, he's declining to speak to the fans. So he's basically screwing the fans, because he's refusing to talk to you through the hated, evil, despised, scumbag media.

    It's hysterical.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    A couple of comments if I may:

    1. Yes, Martz has taken cheap shots at Warner.

    2. I was sitting there yesterday when Martz made the comment ... and I didn't interpret it as a shot at Warner...Martz was giddy, happy, no malice in his heart. We pressed him to describe the Cleeland TD catch and he gave us a brief history and he recounted how he used it once before but Kurt didn't connect on it. I took it as a matter-of-fact recital of what had happened before, not a swipe at Warner.

    I understand how some of you could view it as a poke at Warner -- given Martz's track record -- but to me it didn't come across that way when he mentioned Warner yesterday.

    Cheers,
    B

    BernieM wrote:
    Bbref....

    yes, I do think that some in the locker room are thriving on the circle the wagons mentality....which is good for them....anything that works is fine by me.

    Cheers,
    B

    BernieM wrote:
    I need to vent...sorry...early wake-up call in Seattle, long flight, short time to write a column.

    In advance let me say that NONE of this is directed at any posters here. And again....I'm just venting...need an outlet...thanks for putting up with it....and providing some therapy for me.

    Just checked my e-mail.... question: is it possible for everyone to enjoy a playoff victory?

    The e-mails were remarkably acidic for the day...
    -01-09-2005, 06:37 PM
  • RamWraith
    Lots of The Bernie
    by RamWraith
    BernieM wrote:
    I'll try to break it down for you, saintloser....

    last week Rams played the 31st run defense in the NFL .... and didn't run....and didn't play Steven Jackson.

    This week they line up against the 11th run defense in the NFL ... and make a determined effort to run....and go 73 yards for a TD in 10 running plays ... with JACKSON AND FAULK SHARING THE LOAD.

    (In other words: (A) team is capable of running; (B) Jackson and Faulk can be used with great effectiveness; it doesn't have to be one or the other.

    So this would lead a reasonable mind to wonder ... why didn't the Rams -- with a bad QB at the helm no less -- try to run it at Arizona last week? It just reveals what a horrible, flawed gameplan they had in Arizona.

    Got it?

    Thanks.

    Cheers,
    B

    BernieM wrote:
    markd...

    the line is doing a terrific job, opening holes, and pushing the Eagles inside on those outside-design runs.

    You can see the difference....

    Faulk has the holes, and he's been productive, with 7 carries for 38 yards so far. But with the same set of circumstances, Jackson is going off, with 9 carries for 100 yards. He's able to bust it loose and take it down the field.

    Faulk does look better tonight than he has in a while.

    Cheers,
    B

    BernieM wrote:
    Marshall can be a useful spot player..... as long as he's willing to accept the role.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    at the Edward Jones Dome....said it's disgraceful...and needs to be replaced, the sooner the better....he's been pushing for it...asked the media to make it an issue. (upset over injuries, concussion to Cleeland, and the late-game injury to the Philly player, Thomas Tapeh)...


    also.... Martz says Bulger has been hurt all season (shoulder) and that no one knew about it....says the shoulder has been sore since the first game of the season .... and that the two weeks off helped make it stronger.

    Cheers,
    B

    BernieM wrote:
    Sorry, but I don't rip coaches who go 12-4 and squeeze wins out of a team in transition, as Martz did last season.

    Say what you want, think what you want, insult me, whatever.

    Won't change my mind. Martz did a helluva job in 2003.

    This year his coaching has been pretty bad.

    As I've said before, I don't dumb myself down just to appease a mob. I write columns based on what's happening and what I know to be true.

    Coaches and managers have good seasons and bad seasons, just as players do. Witness La Russa and Baker in 2003 and 2004. They basically switched places in terms of their respective performances from 2003 to 2004.


    Cheers, ...
    -12-31-2004, 04:52 AM
  • Nick
    Post-Game Bernie
    by Nick
    Post subject: Rams: Fire Away

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today's loss and performance was inexcusable. I watched the Saints' first two games, and they are not a good football team.

    You don't have to worry about me trying to defend anyone....except for maybe Bulger. Anyone who tries to blame this one on him is really reaching, but I know that some of the Warner worshipers will take the lazy and dishonest way out and rip him, anyway. He passed for 358 yards, completed 65 percent, and held up fine in a 1-dimensional offense that gave New O a chance to tee off on him. He also led the team down (with no timeouts) on a tremendous drive for the go-ahead TD in the final minute. OT drive wasn't impressive but they committed two penalties and didn't try to throw downfield.....if you aren't going to try and run in that situation, then why call really short passes underneath for only 2 or 3 yards?

    The Rams have a long list of screw-ups today:

    12 penalties today.

    special-teams: awful again. today, three s-teams penalties, a long PR allowed, an a botched squib kick.

    defense: no takeaways in three games plus an OT.

    defense: last two games, 878 yards and 55 points allowed. and repeat: no big plays.

    offense: the imbalance has reached insane proportions. Last two
    games, 90 pass attempts, 30 runs. Bulger has been sacked 10 times the last two weeks. He won't survive the season. he's going down. and today the Rams faced the league's 31st-ranked rushing defense and never attacked it on the ground, thus going 1-dimensional and giving New O an easier time of defending the Rams.

    Coaching: Martz's decision to go for the squib kick was numbingly bad. Wilkiins put two KOs in the end zone today. The KOR defense was actually solid for once. Yes, Lewis is dangerous. But c'mon...you let them set up at the 42, with 28 seconds left and three timeouts remaining? Against that soft Rams defense? A regular kickoff would have certainly taken more time off the clock....as it turned out, the squib took only 4 seconds off the clock. And on the defensive side, Marmie had his boys playing soft in the OT, with no blitzes and their DBs playing deep and leaving the middle open. Ridiculous.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rams are in a pickle.

    Faulk isn't close to being the #28 we saw in his prime. Arizona was a fluke; he cruised through gaping holes. Today I was startled that on two-three occasions, he had a LB out in space, 1-1 and couldn't outrun him or dodge to get around him. The speed has really diminished.

    And with a throttled-down Faulk....this situation cries for Steven Jackson, who can at least power for yards and break...
    -09-26-2004, 06:04 PM
  • RamWraith
    Bernie on Warner
    by RamWraith
    The thing that surprised me (and probably the rest of us, too) is that the Giants signed Warner without seeing him throwing the ball during a formal audition/workout. I know they couldn't work him out while he was still under contract to the Rams....but how can you make a deal with him without at least inspecting how he throws? Why not take a day to do that before completing the final deal? Despite what Kurt's agent says, no other teams were aggressively pursuing him. The Giants could have stalled for a day or two.

    Cheers,
    Bernie
    -06-21-2004, 05:06 PM
Working...
X