Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Bernie bits

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

  • The Bernie bits

    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 after a playoff win.

    Some sample comments made to me:

    * Why do you write about Bulger? He'll never be as good as Warner.
    * Nice column on Bulger, but I noticed how you chose Bulger as the topic because obviously you hate Martz and will not give him credit for anything.
    * It's a shame, Bernie, that you let your hatred of Martz interfere with your objectivity. You didn't write one positive word about Martz in your column.
    * I can't believe you didn't at least give Martz kudos for having his team ready to play hard.

    There were many more like that.

    Huh?

    Did anyone read the Friday column, and the Saturday column, which was full of praise for Martz? How many times in the last week have I said that Martz did a great job of blocking out all the BS to get his team ready to play and win those final two games?

    Burwell wanted to write a "big picture" type of column that would include Martz. I decided, then, to zero in on Bulger and his first playoff win -- and what a reversal of fortune it was from a year ago. Instead of having two columns that said the same thing -- which is bad form -- we split it up.

    2 questions:

    * what percentage of people who read columns are free basing crack cocaine? what other explanation can there be for such vacant mental capabilities?

    * why can't folks just be pleased with a victory and, if this is what they want, positive Rams coverage in the newspaper?

    I feel better now. Thanks. sorry for my whining.



    (by the way....Monday's column, which has already been written, is about Martz).

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Uncle Buck,

    You're right on the money.

    I've discovered, increasingly, that it's a waste of time to hang around locker rooms.

    Not much truth spoken there.

    I wish sportswriters were more like theater and art and film critics; just watch the performance and critique it. That's how it used to be.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

    BernieM wrote:
    Martz vs. Mora again.

    It's been a testy rivalry.

    Lot of crowing from Mora whenever his team (whether it be the ***** defense or now Atlanta) prevails over Martz.

    Martz owes him one.

    Cheers,
    Bernie

  • #2
    Re: The Bernie bits

    I am getting tired of reading Bernie's stuff. Its really a waste of time. He's like a 14 year old girl gossiping about the "cool kids." All innuendo, no insight or information. Why does this guy have a job?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Bernie bits

      I am tired of bernie also....

      Making a mental note to not open his articles in the future.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Bernie bits

        Way to go Bernie the dolt.

        When the fans point out your last of understanding ........... way to round on them.

        Man, this fool has lost the place and is well out of touch with the fans of the Rams.

        Instead of writing this he should be singing the praises of the Rams just now but no, taking pot shots at Faulk, just how low will this fool go.

        __________________________________________________________
        Keeping the Rams Nation Talking

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Bernie bits

          Every article Bernie writes just cements his status as an idiot more and more.
          Clannie Nominee for ClanRam's Thickest Poster

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Bernie bits

            BernieM is the man. Seriously, way to stick it to the fickel fans in STL. Growing up around that town, most of the fans are some of the most knowledgeable fans on sports anywhere. However, the knowledgeable ones aren't the most vocal. It's the stupid ones that always want to be heard that seem to ruin it for everyone.

            Bernie is right on the money. The STL fan has a big heart but the most vocal have pea brains.

            Trust me on this one. The small vocal minority always need to ride the short bus.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Bernie bits

              Originally posted by txramsfan
              BernieM is the man. Seriously, way to stick it to the fickel fans in STL. Growing up around that town, most of the fans are some of the most knowledgeable fans on sports anywhere. However, the knowledgeable ones aren't the most vocal. It's the stupid ones that always want to be heard that seem to ruin it for everyone.

              Bernie is right on the money. The STL fan has a big heart but the most vocal have pea brains.

              Trust me on this one. The small vocal minority always need to ride the short bus.
              Tx, that's a good analysis of St. Louis sports fans. It's like the Michael Moore phenomenon...the biggest morons always have the biggest microphones.

              Still can't always agree with Bernie, but good analysis Tx.
              The more things change, the more they stay the same.

              Comment

              Related Topics

              Collapse

              • 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
              • 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 speaks
                by RamWraith
                The players like Martz a lot. They're very loyal to him. They know he falls on swords to protect them -- often taking the blame for a play that a player messes up.

                Player relations are the least of his concerns.

                Cheers,
                Bernie

                BernieM wrote:
                Well, here we go again...

                I guess ol' Bernie is being too soft on Martz again.

                That's funny.

                Martz was so upset by what I wrote last Thursday, Sunday and Monday he complained to at least three other prominent STL media people wondering why I'm out to get him.


                Cheers,
                Bernie
                -10-02-2004, 05:52 AM
              • 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
              Working...
              X