Give Me Your Playoff Five

[Rex]

A Saints fan and a Panthers fan talking smack to each other on a Seahawks forum. Hmmm. :snack:

Lol. Didn't really expect to run into an NFC South opponent on a Seahawk forum. Stuff happens, I guess.

It was a great rivalry between the Rams and Saints before realignment. NO is awesome. RIP Buddy D.

 

[Maulbert]

A Saints fan and a Panthers fan talking smack to each other on a Seahawks forum. Hmmm. :snack:

Lol. Didn't really expect to run into an NFC South opponent on a Seahawk forum. Stuff happens, I guess.

Certainly wasn't criticizing. Thought it was kind of funny. I like the fact that this board has decent enemy posters. Cheers! :thirishdrinkers:

 

[Ramfan128]

The Rams will have to show me something at quarterback before I get on that bandwagon

Understandable point of view.

You probably don't watch the Rams, at all right?

I don't know where this stat comes from, but the Rams GM said that something like the NFL average win % with a backup QB is 30%. The Rams have gone 10-15 over the last year and a half - good for a 40% win percentage.

Now, couple things about that...

1. The Rams have likely had the toughest schedule in that timeframe
2. The Rams had games started by 3 different backup QBs in that span (Clemens, Hill, Davis)
3. Some Very impressive wins led by a backup QB - home against Seattle and Denver last year; the year before a 38-8 drubbing of the Colts on the road
4. Although they were two very bad teams, the Rams beat the Raiders and Redskins by a combined 76-0 in a two week span.

So while I agree with your premise (we need more out of a QB) - logic dictates that a QB capable of playing at a league average level should easily elevate the team into the playoffs. Foles has proven he is capable of that, now we just need him to continue that as a Ram.

On the flip side you better hope and pray that Rodgers doesn't go down - otherwise you're staring at a very, very bad season.

 

[Maulbert]

The Rams will have to show me something at quarterback before I get on that bandwagon

Understandable point of view.

You probably don't watch the Rams, at all right?

I don't know where this stat comes from, but the Rams GM said that something like the NFL average win % with a backup QB is 30%. The Rams have gone 10-15 over the last year and a half - good for a 40% win percentage.

Now, couple things about that...

1. The Rams have likely had the toughest schedule in that timeframe
2. The Rams had games started by 3 different backup QBs in that span (Clemens, Hill, Davis)
3. Some Very impressive wins led by a backup QB - home against Seattle and Denver last year; the year before a 38-8 drubbing of the Colts on the road
4. Although they were two very bad teams, the Rams beat the Raiders and Redskins by a combined 76-0 in a two week span.

So while I agree with your premise (we need more out of a QB) - logic dictates that a QB capable of playing at a league average level should easily elevate the team into the playoffs. Foles has proven he is capable of that, now we just need him to continue that as a Ram.

On the flip side you better hope and pray that Rodgers doesn't go down - otherwise you're staring at a very, very bad season.

The argument I would have from that standpoint would be the typical backup might have to start with little to no reps with the first team on short notice when the starter goes down. The fact is, St. Louis has played more with backups than starters at QB, so by the end of the last couple seasons, it was like playing with a low quality starter, not a backup. Look at how bad the Cardinals got when Lindley had to play. Not saying it was a lack of reps, but unfamiliarity can't help.

 

[Ramfan128]

The Rams will have to show me something at quarterback before I get on that bandwagon

Understandable point of view.

You probably don't watch the Rams, at all right?

I don't know where this stat comes from, but the Rams GM said that something like the NFL average win % with a backup QB is 30%. The Rams have gone 10-15 over the last year and a half - good for a 40% win percentage.

Now, couple things about that...

1. The Rams have likely had the toughest schedule in that timeframe
2. The Rams had games started by 3 different backup QBs in that span (Clemens, Hill, Davis)
3. Some Very impressive wins led by a backup QB - home against Seattle and Denver last year; the year before a 38-8 drubbing of the Colts on the road
4. Although they were two very bad teams, the Rams beat the Raiders and Redskins by a combined 76-0 in a two week span.

So while I agree with your premise (we need more out of a QB) - logic dictates that a QB capable of playing at a league average level should easily elevate the team into the playoffs. Foles has proven he is capable of that, now we just need him to continue that as a Ram.

On the flip side you better hope and pray that Rodgers doesn't go down - otherwise you're staring at a very, very bad season.

The argument I would have from that standpoint would be the typical backup might have to start with little to no reps with the first team on short notice when the starter goes down. The fact is, St. Louis has played more with backups than starters at QB, so by the end of the last couple seasons, it was like playing with a low quality starter, not a backup. Look at how bad the Cardinals got when Lindley had to play. Not saying it was a lack of reps, but unfamiliarity can't help.

That would almost make sense, except that each of the 3 backups QBs started around half a season each - so the team had to try and get familiar with 3 different QBs over the past two years. I guess you could say the team had to get used to playing with bad QB play though.

 

[Rex]

Bad O line play too for same reasons. :34853_doh:

 

[ptisme]

The Rams will have to show me something at quarterback before I get on that bandwagon

Understandable point of view.

You probably don't watch the Rams, at all right?

I don't know where this stat comes from, but the Rams GM said that something like the NFL average win % with a backup QB is 30%. The Rams have gone 10-15 over the last year and a half - good for a 40% win percentage.

Now, couple things about that...

1. The Rams have likely had the toughest schedule in that timeframe
2. The Rams had games started by 3 different backup QBs in that span (Clemens, Hill, Davis)
3. Some Very impressive wins led by a backup QB - home against Seattle and Denver last year; the year before a 38-8 drubbing of the Colts on the road
4. Although they were two very bad teams, the Rams beat the Raiders and Redskins by a combined 76-0 in a two week span.

So while I agree with your premise (we need more out of a QB) - logic dictates that a QB capable of playing at a league average level should easily elevate the team into the playoffs. Foles has proven he is capable of that, now we just need him to continue that as a Ram.

On the flip side you better hope and pray that Rodgers doesn't go down - otherwise you're staring at a very, very bad season.

Same can be said for every NFL team with a top 10 quarterback... Including the Seahawks even....

 

[rideaducati]

The Rams will have to show me something at quarterback before I get on that bandwagon

Understandable point of view.

You probably don't watch the Rams, at all right?

I don't know where this stat comes from, but the Rams GM said that something like the NFL average win % with a backup QB is 30%. The Rams have gone 10-15 over the last year and a half - good for a 40% win percentage.

Now, couple things about that...

1. The Rams have likely had the toughest schedule in that timeframe
2. The Rams had games started by 3 different backup QBs in that span (Clemens, Hill, Davis)
3. Some Very impressive wins led by a backup QB - home against Seattle and Denver last year; the year before a 38-8 drubbing of the Colts on the road
4. Although they were two very bad teams, the Rams beat the Raiders and Redskins by a combined 76-0 in a two week span.

So while I agree with your premise (we need more out of a QB) - logic dictates that a QB capable of playing at a league average level should easily elevate the team into the playoffs. Foles has proven he is capable of that, now we just need him to continue that as a Ram.

On the flip side you better hope and pray that Rodgers doesn't go down - otherwise you're staring at a very, very bad season.

Same can be said for every NFL team with a top 10 quarterback... Including the Seahawks even....

The Seahawks won 50% of the games their backup QB started in 2011. The talent around him was about where the rams talent level is now too.

 

[Ramfan128]

The Rams will have to show me something at quarterback before I get on that bandwagon

Understandable point of view.

You probably don't watch the Rams, at all right?

I don't know where this stat comes from, but the Rams GM said that something like the NFL average win % with a backup QB is 30%. The Rams have gone 10-15 over the last year and a half - good for a 40% win percentage.

Now, couple things about that...

1. The Rams have likely had the toughest schedule in that timeframe
2. The Rams had games started by 3 different backup QBs in that span (Clemens, Hill, Davis)
3. Some Very impressive wins led by a backup QB - home against Seattle and Denver last year; the year before a 38-8 drubbing of the Colts on the road
4. Although they were two very bad teams, the Rams beat the Raiders and Redskins by a combined 76-0 in a two week span.

So while I agree with your premise (we need more out of a QB) - logic dictates that a QB capable of playing at a league average level should easily elevate the team into the playoffs. Foles has proven he is capable of that, now we just need him to continue that as a Ram.

On the flip side you better hope and pray that Rodgers doesn't go down - otherwise you're staring at a very, very bad season.

Same can be said for every NFL team with a top 10 quarterback... Including the Seahawks even....

The Seahawks won 50% of the games their backup QB started in 2011. The talent around him was about where the rams talent level is now too.

Are you talking about the two games Whitehurst started? Jackson started 14 games, and he was the starting QB.

Also, the West was much worse back then.

And no way the Hawks in 2011 were anywhere close to where the Rams are now. For reference, we finished one game worse last year than you guys did that year, with two different QBs starting 8 games each, both backups and I'd say both worse than Travaris Jackson.......but you guys got to play a bad Rams and bad Cardinals team 4 times that year.

Last year all our division rivals finished .500 or better. Big difference.

 

[Rex]

And no way the Hawks in 2011 were anywhere close to where the Rams are now. For reference, we finished one game worse last year than you guys did that year, with two different QBs starting 8 games each, both backups and I'd say both worse than Travaris Jackson.......but you guys got to play a bad Rams and bad Cardinals team 4 times that year.

Last year all our division rivals finished .500 or better. Big difference.

Preach it brother! :th2thumbs: No doubt about it. The is the year of the Rams! :0190l:

 

[rideaducati]

Understandable point of view.

You probably don't watch the Rams, at all right?

I don't know where this stat comes from, but the Rams GM said that something like the NFL average win % with a backup QB is 30%. The Rams have gone 10-15 over the last year and a half - good for a 40% win percentage.

Now, couple things about that...

1. The Rams have likely had the toughest schedule in that timeframe
2. The Rams had games started by 3 different backup QBs in that span (Clemens, Hill, Davis)
3. Some Very impressive wins led by a backup QB - home against Seattle and Denver last year; the year before a 38-8 drubbing of the Colts on the road
4. Although they were two very bad teams, the Rams beat the Raiders and Redskins by a combined 76-0 in a two week span.

So while I agree with your premise (we need more out of a QB) - logic dictates that a QB capable of playing at a league average level should easily elevate the team into the playoffs. Foles has proven he is capable of that, now we just need him to continue that as a Ram.

On the flip side you better hope and pray that Rodgers doesn't go down - otherwise you're staring at a very, very bad season.

Same can be said for every NFL team with a top 10 quarterback... Including the Seahawks even....

The Seahawks won 50% of the games their backup QB started in 2011. The talent around him was about where the rams talent level is now too.

Are you talking about the two games Whitehurst started? Jackson started 14 games, and he was the starting QB.

Also, the West was much worse back then.

And no way the Hawks in 2011 were anywhere close to where the Rams are now. For reference, we finished one game worse last year than you guys did that year, with two different QBs starting 8 games each, both backups and I'd say both worse than Travaris Jackson.......but you guys got to play a bad Rams and bad Cardinals team 4 times that year.

Last year all our division rivals finished .500 or better. Big difference.

Tarvaris is not starting material and neither were the rams QBs last season. The Seahawks were better defensively the year Tarvaris started than the rams have been in the last ten years, so you're probably right about the Seahawks not being anywhere close to where the rams are now. By the way, the Seahawks will STILL get to play bad rams and cardinal teams four times a year, but this year we get to add in a bad niner team too. This division is going to look like the AFC South with the winner (Seahawks) of the division running away with it.

 

[Rex]

:177692: :141847_bnono:

 

[Ramfan128]

Tarvaris is not starting material and neither were the rams QBs last season. The Seahawks were better defensively the year Tarvaris started than the rams have been in the last ten years, so you're probably right about the Seahawks not being anywhere close to where the rams are now. By the way, the Seahawks will STILL get to play bad rams and cardinal teams four times a year, but this year we get to add in a bad niner team too. This division is going to look like the AFC South with the winner (Seahawks) of the division running away with it.[/quote]





So let me get this straight - you're saying that the NFC West isn't better now than it was in 2011? If that is your stance, I don't think anything you say could be taken seriously...

7-9 against an easy schedule versus 6-10 with one of the hardest....which team was better? It's not that hard.

Also, the Seahawks lost to that bad Rams team last year...with our 3rd string QB playing..

 

[rideaducati]

So let me get this straight - you're saying that the NFC West isn't better now than it was in 2011? If that is your stance, I don't think anything you say could be taken seriously...

7-9 against an easy schedule versus 6-10 with one of the hardest....which team was better? It's not that hard.

Also, the Seahawks lost to that bad Rams team last year...with our 3rd string QB playing..

I don't think THIS YEAR's NFC West will be very good with exception to the Seahawks. I believe the Seahawks will win the division by at least three games and no other team in the division will be over .500.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut SOME TIME. An analog clock is right twice a day, it doesn't mean it works. The rams beat one or two good teams every year that they shouldn't, it sure meant a whole lot in the playoffs didn't it?

The cards were 24th offensively and defensively, so I think their record was a fluke. They'll be better offensively with Palmer, but that won't do a whole lot for the defense which I believe will finish in the bottom third of the league again.

The rams were a bottom five team offensively and a lower middle defense and I don't think they have done a whole lot to improve. You may "think" they've improved, but how can you convince others that this has happened? A new QB that hasn't done anything yet. A running back coming off knee surgery. Same coaches. Is that a reason for anyone other than ram fan to think they've gotten better? NOPE. Please tell me HOW you think the rams will be better. There has been ZERO improvement on either side of the ball for three years now, but this year is going to somehow be different just because you say so? Sure, the D-line got better rushing the passer, but their run D was awful. Maybe this year they'll focus on their run D and not rush the passer as well, which would be EXACTLY the result I expect because that is the way Fisher's teams "improve". They are only consistent in that one area of the team always improves while at the same time another area of the team falls off by the same amount which equates to a ZERO net gain or often even a LOSS overall.

The niners are going to be a train wreck no matter what niner fans have talked themselves into believing.

Seahawks have lost exactly one starter from the defense and have added a known playmaker on offense. They traded Unger who missed half of the last two seasons and the Seahawks were undefeated in the six games he missed last year. Carpenter was just a guy that should be replaced without much, if any, drop off.

 

[Rex]

Some people ^^^^^^^^^ are oblivious to the facts that 6-10 with a tough schedule and backup QBs does mean TANGIBLE IMPROVEMENT. This year 9-7 at a minimum. :0190l:

 

[rideaducati]

Some people ^^^^^^^^^ are oblivious to the facts that 6-10 with a tough schedule and backup QBs does mean TANGIBLE IMPROVEMENT. This year 9-7 at a minimum. :0190l:

Some people have no idea what "tangible improvement" means. What improvement can you ACTUALLY show me that has happened? There are no "tangible" stats that show ANY SORT of improvement. Rams this year 9-7 MAXIMUM.

 

[Ramfan128]

So let me get this straight - you're saying that the NFC West isn't better now than it was in 2011? If that is your stance, I don't think anything you say could be taken seriously...

7-9 against an easy schedule versus 6-10 with one of the hardest....which team was better? It's not that hard.

Also, the Seahawks lost to that bad Rams team last year...with our 3rd string QB playing..

I don't think THIS YEAR's NFC West will be very good with exception to the Seahawks. I believe the Seahawks will win the division by at least three games and no other team in the division will be over .500.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut SOME TIME. An analog clock is right twice a day, it doesn't mean it works. The rams beat one or two good teams every year that they shouldn't, it sure meant a whole lot in the playoffs didn't it?

The cards were 24th offensively and defensively, so I think their record was a fluke. They'll be better offensively with Palmer, but that won't do a whole lot for the defense which I believe will finish in the bottom third of the league again.

The rams were a bottom five team offensively and a lower middle defense and I don't think they have done a whole lot to improve. You may "think" they've improved, but how can you convince others that this has happened? A new QB that hasn't done anything yet. A running back coming off knee surgery. Same coaches. Is that a reason for anyone other than ram fan to think they've gotten better? NOPE. Please tell me HOW you think the rams will be better. There has been ZERO improvement on either side of the ball for three years now, but this year is going to somehow be different just because you say so? Sure, the D-line got better rushing the passer, but their run D was awful. Maybe this year they'll focus on their run D and not rush the passer as well, which would be EXACTLY the result I expect because that is the way Fisher's teams "improve". They are only consistent in that one area of the team always improves while at the same time another area of the team falls off by the same amount which equates to a ZERO net gain or often even a LOSS overall.

The niners are going to be a train wreck no matter what niner fans have talked themselves into believing.

Seahawks have lost exactly one starter from the defense and have added a known playmaker on offense. They traded Unger who missed half of the last two seasons and the Seahawks were undefeated in the six games he missed last year. Carpenter was just a guy that should be replaced without much, if any, drop off.

At the end of the year, statistically there has been no improvement. But the 2nd half of the season last year the defense was top 5 in most categories. Why is that significant? Teams that typically get hot the 2nd half of the year carry that over to the following year. It's easy to look at rankings and say there's been no improvement, but if you watched the games you might not feel that way. The defense got MUCH better as time went on, and after being the worst run defense in football for 6 weeks or so, we were one of the best.

I'm not saying the Rams will be great, but I'm 100% confident we will be better. Hopefully Foles stays healthy, doesn't matter if you like him or not, he's better than what we've had the past two years.

And that's really why we've been confident the last few years - with a starting QB we're better than 6-10 last year - I don't think anyone would disagree with that. How much better? I'm not sure. I don't need to convince others of anything - I come here because I like enemy forums....typically more than my favorite team's forums (for any sport).

Some Seahawk fans think the Rams will be good this year. Others like yourself don't. We're a popular pick for threads like "Give me 5 teams that will make the playoffs this year that didn't last year". Doesn't mean we will or will not be good.

I have my reservations. I'm not Fisher's biggest fan, but I think it's naïve to say that a team won't be good because a coach is mediocre. Some Ram fans have argued this. I think Fisher can get the Rams to the playoffs...I think this because he's gone to the playoffs before. People point to his record and say he's mediocre....but there are always extenuating circumstances. Coaching nearly his entire tenure with the Titans while having to deal with Peyton Manning was bad luck. That's not something very many coaches had to do. From that perspective, he's a hell of a lot better coach than whomever has coached against the Patriots all these years....at least Fisher led the Titans to 1 or 2 division titles during Peyton Manning's run.

I believe because I've seen the improvement....I've watched every snap the past few years and I think this team could explode this year. But I could also see them going 8-8. And I think that's a dilemma most people have with the Rams this year.

 

[Exittium]

SOOOO BACK ON TOPIC HERE MY playoff five:
In
1 Dolphins
2 Falcons
3 Vikings
4 Chargers
5 Rams

Out
1 NE
2 Saints
3 Packers
4 Denver
5 Cards

 

[rideaducati]

So let me get this straight - you're saying that the NFC West isn't better now than it was in 2011? If that is your stance, I don't think anything you say could be taken seriously...

7-9 against an easy schedule versus 6-10 with one of the hardest....which team was better? It's not that hard.

Also, the Seahawks lost to that bad Rams team last year...with our 3rd string QB playing..

I don't think THIS YEAR's NFC West will be very good with exception to the Seahawks. I believe the Seahawks will win the division by at least three games and no other team in the division will be over .500.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut SOME TIME. An analog clock is right twice a day, it doesn't mean it works. The rams beat one or two good teams every year that they shouldn't, it sure meant a whole lot in the playoffs didn't it?

The cards were 24th offensively and defensively, so I think their record was a fluke. They'll be better offensively with Palmer, but that won't do a whole lot for the defense which I believe will finish in the bottom third of the league again.

The rams were a bottom five team offensively and a lower middle defense and I don't think they have done a whole lot to improve. You may "think" they've improved, but how can you convince others that this has happened? A new QB that hasn't done anything yet. A running back coming off knee surgery. Same coaches. Is that a reason for anyone other than ram fan to think they've gotten better? NOPE. Please tell me HOW you think the rams will be better. There has been ZERO improvement on either side of the ball for three years now, but this year is going to somehow be different just because you say so? Sure, the D-line got better rushing the passer, but their run D was awful. Maybe this year they'll focus on their run D and not rush the passer as well, which would be EXACTLY the result I expect because that is the way Fisher's teams "improve". They are only consistent in that one area of the team always improves while at the same time another area of the team falls off by the same amount which equates to a ZERO net gain or often even a LOSS overall.

The niners are going to be a train wreck no matter what niner fans have talked themselves into believing.

Seahawks have lost exactly one starter from the defense and have added a known playmaker on offense. They traded Unger who missed half of the last two seasons and the Seahawks were undefeated in the six games he missed last year. Carpenter was just a guy that should be replaced without much, if any, drop off.

At the end of the year, statistically there has been no improvement. But the 2nd half of the season last year the defense was top 5 in most categories. Why is that significant? Teams that typically get hot the 2nd half of the year carry that over to the following year. It's easy to look at rankings and say there's been no improvement, but if you watched the games you might not feel that way. The defense got MUCH better as time went on, and after being the worst run defense in football for 6 weeks or so, we were one of the best.

I'm not saying the Rams will be great, but I'm 100% confident we will be better. Hopefully Foles stays healthy, doesn't matter if you like him or not, he's better than what we've had the past two years.

And that's really why we've been confident the last few years - with a starting QB we're better than 6-10 last year - I don't think anyone would disagree with that. How much better? I'm not sure. I don't need to convince others of anything - I come here because I like enemy forums....typically more than my favorite team's forums (for any sport).

Some Seahawk fans think the Rams will be good this year. Others like yourself don't. We're a popular pick for threads like "Give me 5 teams that will make the playoffs this year that didn't last year". Doesn't mean we will or will not be good.

I have my reservations. I'm not Fisher's biggest fan, but I think it's naïve to say that a team won't be good because a coach is mediocre. Some Ram fans have argued this. I think Fisher can get the Rams to the playoffs...I think this because he's gone to the playoffs before. People point to his record and say he's mediocre....but there are always extenuating circumstances. Coaching nearly his entire tenure with the Titans while having to deal with Peyton Manning was bad luck. That's not something very many coaches had to do. From that perspective, he's a hell of a lot better coach than whomever has coached against the Patriots all these years....at least Fisher led the Titans to 1 or 2 division titles during Peyton Manning's run.

I believe because I've seen the improvement....I've watched every snap the past few years and I think this team could explode this year. But I could also see them going 8-8. And I think that's a dilemma most people have with the Rams this year.

Where exactly was the second half improvement last season? I am not seeing it. 3-5 first half, 3-5 second half. I guess I'm not as impressed as you are about two shutouts against two teams with top 5 picks from last season. I have watched every snap the rams have played too (I wish I could get those hours of my life back). I see one week of good passing and poor running followed by good running and poor passing. Net improvement = 0. Then, I see a good pass rush and poor run defense one game followed by good run defense and poor secondary play.. Net improvement = 0. Inconsistency abounds though. The only improvement you can definitely point out and actually have stats to back you up is the pass rush. They had very few sacks in the first half of the season and then went on a pretty good run, but that didn't really amount to overall team improvement, it just sounded really cool to yell SAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACK a bunch of times.

 

[Rex]

I do not believe you have been watching the Rams as much as you claim. Perhaps TV on and you're in the crapper or in the fridge but not watching the Rams. :141847_bnono: