Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lots of The Bernie

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

  • Lots of The Bernie

    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,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Martz can salvage himself if he's smart and calms down and narrows his focus.

    I think the players are amused more than anything by the Martz-Turley stuff.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    My take on Lamar Gordon was idiotic in retrospect.

    But I've never claimed I'll be right on everything.

    If you want to judge me, or anyone, based on a poor analysis of a trade, I'll never pass the test. And that's fine.

    Overall, my Rams analysis has been very accurate this season. I got pasted on here before the season for writing that there's been a talent drain, and that the Rams are sliding, and that the defense would suck, and that they'd finish around .500.

    But yes, I was way off on Gordon.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Assuming (and that's a leap, I know) that the Rams defeat the Jets...

    Where are the Rams most likely to get help this weekend?

    Atlanta winning at Seattle?

    Or Minnesota losing at Washington?

    I'd probably go with Minnesota going down, because the Redskins have played outstanding defense all season. Don't trust Mike Tice in a big game, either.

    Agree? Disagree?

    The scoreboard watching will be fun.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    I think it's a fair question and I wrestled with it before I was critical of Martz in the column after the Philadelphia game.

    But I sincerely am disappointed that he didn't give the running game more of a chance this season. And I truly believe it would have made a difference in the season. And I (and many others) have been consistent in calling for a more vigorous running game all season.

    So I really think it was fair game to ask: if you could devote the game plan to the running game on Monday night and get such terrific results, isn't it a shame you didn't try this earlier?

    They have done well this season when they've made a dedicated effort in running the ball.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    I'm not sure what Martz will be told to do.
    But some changes will be requested.

    Actually I'm puzzled as to why anyone would ask me about this, considering I know nothing about the Rams or football.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Well, for starters last year he scaled back the offense to accomodate Bulger. It was easier to run, and had fewer elements. The playbook was trimmed back quite a bit. And the offense did score a lot of points.

    This year Martz didn't do the same thing when Bulger went down; he kept the same offense up and running when Chandler went in, and we saw what a disaster that was.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:

    The Rams exploited Philly's blitzes with the running game. Jackson and Faulk both cashed in. Jackson was able to do more damage.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    sorry ... I share your theory that Jackson seems to dislike Martz personally....but I have no knowledge of anything happening between them in the past .... something unpleasant like an argument or an insult (from Martz) or whatever. But Jackson -- at least what I've seen -- has seemed to be pretty hard on the Rams and Martz.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    A birdie to tells me that iIn his post news conference briefing, Martz floated the idea that maybe his fussing and making a big deal over the turf at the Ed Jones Dome would be picked up by the Jets and put a thought into their heads.... .you know, the turf is rock hard, and dangerous and could leave them vulnerable to injury.

    Some gamesmanship by the coach?

    In fairness to Martz, his concerns for his own players' health are legit, and he's right in pushing for a new surface.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Things can always change....I'm serious....Martz and Turley are both really moody, overly sensitive guys....but as it's been said, the closest thing to love is hate (and vice versa). I do not rule out the chance of Turley returning to the Rams.... a real longshot, but not impossible.'

    There are other issues....

    can turley play? will he physically be able to do it?

    Hadley and others are saying that the Rams may be compiling a case against Turley....trying to show that he violated his contract by not properly rehabbing the injury....that they may seek to have the contract voided, so they won't have any finacial responsibilities to him.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:

    Martz does a lot of things well.

    He's responsible for the best run of success in pro football that this town has ever seen.

    That's also what makes him so disappointing ... when he gets into these stubborn ruts in calling plays.

    I've defended him often. Will do so again if I think he's getting a raw deal. Some fans whine about stuff that has never cost the Rams a win. When I criticize Martz, it's based on important stuff that makes the difference between winning and losing. Like not running the ball against a soft run defense when you're trying to compete with a bad QB. (The loss at Arizona last week).

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Martz is a good guy.

    Just insecure.

    And when the insecurity really festers, it impacts his coaching in a negative way.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    just one stat that jumped out at me...

    This year the Jets scored 34 at S. Diego in their first road game.

    Since then, they haven't scored more than 17 on the road and have averaged 11.6 points in their last six road games.

    They also have Curtis Martin (more than 1,500 yards rushing and 12 TDs) locked and loaded on that squishy Rams front seven.

    Control Martin, and they could win this game...

    Cheers,
    B

    BernieM wrote:
    I appreciate the Football101 lesson. Thanks.

    As this offense has evolved, there's been a need for more balance. This isn't the same unstoppable passing attack we saw from 1999-2001. That's because of a number of reasons which I've discussed many times, but won't repeat here.

    You're confusing me with one of these 3-yard dust-cloud guys. Nothing could be further than the truth. But when you see a defense that hasn't stopped anyone on the ground all year, basic pragmatism tells you that it's probably a good idea to attack with the run.

    as for the New Orleans game, I suppose you forgot (which I understand, I can't remember stuff, either) the flow of the game as well as the switch in the Saints' defensive tactics once the Rams opened with the passing attack....

    Rams did open up with an effective passing attack. Bulger hit on four of five on an opening TD drive. And then he started the second drive with two completions....looking good....6 of 8 passing early... but from the conclusion to that first drive to the early minutes of the fourth quarter, the Rams got only a FG and didn't score a TD....

    why? well, New Orleans started dropping LBs into coverage, knowing that the pass was coming on virtually every down. During that scoring drought -- one FG in more than two quarters -- Bulger attempted 19 passes. Nine were completed. Three times he was sacked, once for a fumble and turnover. And there was also a holding penalty on a passing attempt. The passing game bogged down. When the Saints dropped the LBs into the passing lanes, pragmatism dictates that you hit them with the run, and make them put more defenders back into the box....and then you zap 'em again with the passes.

    On the drive that ended with the Rams' first TD since the first quarter, Martz opened with two runs by Faulk...drew the LBs up...the passed....effectively.

    Again: pragmatism.

    I'm just into pragmatic play calling.

    Especially if the QB play is lacking.

    Let's see ....Chandler is the QB and they open up and throw and keep throwing in losses at Carolina and Arizona and the results are disastrous.

    But Bulger returns -- a "remarkable" QB according to Martz -- and they open the game vs. Philly with a 10-run drive for a TD.

    Interesting.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    I agree; i have to worry a little about Jackson's knee. isn't a good sign that two heavy-load games result in the knee getting banged up. the turf doesn't help.

    Cheers,
    B

    BernieM wrote:
    I've covered, first hand, some nutty things in the NFL....

    Bob Irsay owning the Colts and showing up drunk for games, and giving bizarre interviews. (remind me to tell you the Bo Jackson story sometime).

    Colts coach Frank Kush having a pitcher of root beer dumped on his head in the training-camp cafeteria by a rookie he'd just cut.

    Jack Kent Cooke, the late Redskins owner...never knew who was going to show up in his box at RFK.

    Two franchise moves. Colts and Cardinals. No, make that three franchise moves...Rams, too.

    The decline of Tom Landry. I was there for his final season.

    Jerry Jones swooping in to buy the Cowboys, firing Landry, hiring Jimmy Johnson.

    But I have to say ... this stuff at Rams Park has been as crazy as it gets. the three guys upstairs barely talking to each other (zygmunt, martz, armey). all three of them ripping each other behind the scenes...shaw in and out, running the team from LA much of the time....Martz getting into it with Turley....Martz trying to intimidate and control the media....Martz and steven jackson and their seemingly icy relationship. (strange; something is up but we can't figure it out). .... on and on....martz not knowing who he's playing in games....marshall faulk deciding who plays at RB...I know I'm forgetting some stuff, too....it's really a damned shame.

    Cheers,
    B

    BernieM wrote:

    As for Zygmunt and Martz....that's a bit of a mystery, since both guys are tight-lipped about it around us, even in background settings.

    My theory is tha zygmunt grew weary of Martz's power grabs....not wanting to listen to Armey or anyone else in the organization....I think Zyggy has tried to shift some of that power back, and he's gotten more involved in personnel -- probably forcing some moves that Martz didn't like, but agreed to. (Martz wasn't in favor of trading Lamar Gordon but deferred). Martz of course will dislike any attempt to move the power away from him.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:

    The truly unfortunate thing about this is, it's such a disservice to Bulger....a class act, a good leader, and a good QB. Sometimes a very good quarterback. But he can't live up to Martz's constant hype of him. I know Mike is trying to pump up a key player, but he's not really helping Bulger with this stuff.

    Cheers,
    B

    BernieM wrote:
    Two things:

    * I have no idea if Archuleta is juiced or not. I mean, it's something that people have speculated about, but my policy is unless there's solid proof, I won't make any allegations.

    * In Hadley's defense, he did ask Claiborne for permission to write about what Claibs had said. And Claiborne didn't blurt out the steroids thing in a private conversation, either. I talked to him yesterday and he'd be happy to take phone calls on KFNS on this. He isn't hiding from anything.

    I don't have a horse in this race....

    Same with the argument (or whatever) on another thread about Haldey and Slaten. I get along well with both of them, and whatever animosity there is between them, I stay out of it.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:

    I'm not perfect in this regard, but I pretty much share what I know. i don't keep secrets unless it's of a gossipy nature concerning someone's private life, which is off limits unless there's a direct connection to the athlete's performance. And even then, I need facts -- no just hearsay.

    Sure, coaches and managers and athletes will talk on background, just so we have more details, more of an understanding, of what's going on with a certain situation. But when I am backgrounded, what I hear makes it into print in one form or another.

    This is one of the reasons why Martz got upset with me a couple of years ago; he called me into his office for a chat one Sunday morning, basically went off on Kurt Warner, and i wrote a synopsis of what he said. Martz was angry with me, because he believed it was an off-the-record conversation. It wasn't. I took notes the whole time. And if he had feelings about Warner, I was going to let the readers know about it, which I did.

    Of course, when i wrote about the anomisity between Warner and Martz, two things happened:

    1. Others in the STL sports media such as Steve Savard joined hands with Martz to try and discredit what I had written.

    2. Fans thought I was trying to stir the pot and ignite controversy, even though I was minding my own business until Martz asked for a visit. So I was lambasted there, too.

    (And by the way: we all know what happened with the Martz-Warner relationship).

    Fans say they want tough reporting and digging from reporters...but when reporters deliver, we're often urinated upon by the very same fans, and other media people who want to shine a coach's shoes to curry favor with him.

    Just when I wrote about how Tino Martinez was a problem in the 2003 clubhouse. Some of the same players and baseball staffers who told me about it later told other media that Tino was a great guy. And fans (not all) accused me of all sorts of things, because most fans don't want their fantasy shattered by hearing something negative about one of their "boys" who play for the Cardinals.

    I was vindicated in both instances; Warner and Martinez were dumped. And to this day Martz takes subtle digs at Warner -- like this most recent stuff about how Bulger is the best QB he's ever coached. It's just so juvenile.

    But it's sad that a journalist has to go through this -- getting whizzed on by other media and by fans -- for trying to do his job.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

  • #2
    Re: Lots of The Bernie

    You know, I just noticed something about Bernie. He's exactly like Martz.


    Both of them should stay above the fray and not dignify their detractors' criticisms with comments. Instead, both of them are prone to defensive rantings that only highlight how maligned they really are

    Kind of funny if you think about it.

    Comment

    Related Topics

    Collapse

    • 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
      The Bernie Speaks
      by RamWraith
      On Martz bashing:

      BernieM wrote:
      This has got to be the most shrill thread in the history of the Press Box.

      I got a good laugh at the post where the 12th Ram said, basically, that I should rely on facts rather than sensationalism and speculation.

      Which is beautifully ironic, since I constantly rely on facts in discussing Martz's credentials instead of falling back on the blind outrage that we see so often in here from Martz's critics.

      I always stick to the facts when assessing Martz.

      He has a winning percentage that's the 4th highest among NFL head coaches since the merger (50-game minimum). And his won-loss percentage compared to all previous STL head coaches, Cardinals and Rams. And the STL's NFL record before Martz arrived in a leadership position (1999) and after he arrived. And the five-year run of offense that's one of the most prolific in NFL history. And the fact that he's turned the team back around after the early-season collapse in 2002, when he had to transition to another QB. They've won 20 of 29 games since then, a winning percentage of .689. And someone -- I forget who -- actually referred in here to the Rams here as "mediocre."

      His team's playoff performances (super bowl 2001, and vs. Carolina last year) have been disappointing. I will not contest that.

      But I respect his entire body of work as a coach.

      I also respect passion, but somewhere along the line, some of you have lost perspective.

      Cheers,
      Bernie


      On a poster's statement that Martz has not brought in great players:

      BernieM wrote:
      This gets better all the time.

      I'll go down the list provided by one of the Martz haters in here:

      Faulk....Pre-Martz. CLARIFICATION: Vermeil wanted to trade Faulk during Marshall's holdout. Martz and others convinced him otherwise. Faulk was in DV's doghouse early in the season because he wanted to save his legs by not practicing all of the time. Martz intervened. I suppose a reasonable person would also acknowledge that Faulk seemed to do well in the Martz offense.

      Bruce....Pre-Martz. CLARIFICATION: DV and Bruce had a problem. They didn't like each other. Vermeil called Bruce out, referring to him as a "so-called team leader." Bruce was crushed. He also developed a serious hamstring problem because of DV's marathon practices. One of the reasons Shaw wanted to hire Martz was because Martz had a special relationship with Bruce and the Rams needed to get Bruce back on track.

      Holt....Pre-Martz. CLARIFICATION: False. Martz was already in place as the offensive coordinator and autonomous leader of the offense when the Rams made the decision to draft Holt. Martz worked Holtz out before the draft, and recommended drafting him. As did others in the organization.
      ...
      -09-17-2004, 05:28 AM
    • RamWraith
      The Bernie speaks
      by RamWraith
      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...
      -10-04-2004, 04:34 AM
    • RamWraith
      The Bernie has some intersting statements
      by RamWraith
      On today's game

      I wanted to leave in the 2nd quarter.

      And then the Rams locker room after the game -- what a joke.

      PR guys -- namely Duane Lewis-- cutting off interviews after a minute, preventing reporters from asking questions...

      Players with attitudes. I mean, Aveion Caison was barking at people to get away from his locker. Who is he? Does he play for the Rams? When's the last time he touched the football in a game?

      Real tough guys -- afterwards, of course, when they're going up against fat sportswriters and 90-pound radio weaklings.

      On the field: different story.

      Of course, some players were taking it all in in stride... smiling, laughing. Real broken up by the loss.

      Can't wait for a new head coach -- and please, please, please, make it someone with discipline and toughness and character.

      --B

      On Greg Williams (future Ram coach?)

      He is on the unofficial short list.

      And today's game will help his case.

      (Though, it must be said, this was an easy offense to tame today. Terrible O-line, rookie QB, one-dimensional approach, awful play-calling).

      Will he get the job?

      Tough to say. If he demands a lot of power, he won't get it.

      He may want KC's job, anyway, if DV retires.

      Williams is from the KC area.

      --B

      On Steven Jackson

      Whatever his flaws are in running style, they ain't going to get any better unless he gets a consistent # of carries from week to week.

      They don't run him between the tackles enough.

      Way too many runs designed to go outside.

      By calling inside runs, it will discipline him to focus more on being a north-south runner.

      --B

      On Martz cleaning out his locker

      Martz cleared his things out on his own.

      The media work room is downstairs.

      The coaching offices are upstairs.

      I doubt that Jim Thomas wants to stare out the window --which is on the other side of the room -- all day to look at the parking lot to see who is coming and going. He has stories to write.

      --B

      It's not strange at all to me, because I've been saying for the last 4-6 weeks that Martz was gone and would not coach this team in '06.

      Which is why I wrote a month or so ago that Shaw should just go ahead and make the move and get on with the future instead of playing charades.

      Others in the media are finally saying the same thing.

      --B

      On Colt's O vs 99' Rams O

      The 1999 Rams had the best 1-yr offense I've ever seen.

      --B
      -12-05-2005, 04:53 AM
    • RamWraith
      The Bernie comments
      by RamWraith
      I also made fun of myself and my anti-draft stance in the column by saying that I invested my time in my time in more serious and important things like Strat O Matic baseball. That was designed to let the reader know -- don't take my growling abour the draft too seriously, but I guess that didn't register with everyone. Too bad I can't use the "wink" emoticon in print.

      Martz, by the way, was ticked off by the column.

      I got a weird and rather hostile voice mail from him at 8 a.m. this morning. I can't figure the man out. He was bothered by me saying that he'd finally made special teams a priority...he says special teams have always been a priority to him. Well, at the recent minicamp he said the opposite....that he made mistakes and realized he had to keep special teams in mind when he brought in defensive players.

      Here's the quote:

      "That's a mistake I've made in the past when we've gone after defensive players," Martz said. "We've spent so much time looking for ability only on defense, but really didn't go into the next phase of that. You have to be equally significant on special teams. We made an issue of it this year both in free agency and the draft. So hopefully, we'll make a quantum leap."

      And he said the same thing but on even stronger terms when I had him on as a guest on KMOX...why would he be offended by someone saying he's put more of a priority on special teams?

      Cheers,
      Bernie

      Post Subject: Front Office

      I have new reasons to believe it's worse than ever.

      No details, yet, but I'll be looking into it.

      It will come down to this: will Shaw side with Martz or Zygmunt? It's really that simple.

      To their credit, Martz-Armey-Zygmunt and Shaw pulled together and had a very good offseason.

      Cheers,
      Bernie

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

      Post subject: Yesterday's Article on Rams Offseason

      For the record, and I know this is kind of silly on my part, because whenever I'm asked to respond to something and I do -- and my answers aren't satisfactory to those asking for a response, I'm accused of being defensive.

      But anyway, just to be cordial....

      I'm trying to figure out where in the column I criticized other fans who like the draft. I merely wrote that I don't like all of the draft beeswax, but then also poked fun at myself for playing Strat O Matic. In other words: we all have our obsessions. I'm no different.

      I didn't criticize Internet writers here, or in the column. For example I think Barry Waller does a thoughtful, comprehensive job and I always look forward to what he has to say. He's also at Rams Park, doing the reporting, so I trust him. I didn't criticize the Herd...
      -05-20-2005, 05:04 AM
    Working...
    X