[HopHead Ram]

I say that because it seems that he throws the flag pretty quickly. When cameras pan to him, he seems to take the players input more than a staffer input of the replay. I could be wrong, but I don't know if he waits long enough to get an input from replay.

Fisher addressed the challenges today on his radio show. Basically had to go with what he saw live on the field. Said that when you are the away team, they never show the replay on the screen and they do not get the TV feeds in the booth so there isn't anybody up there looking at it in slow mo with different angles to let him know to throw the flag or not. In real time, with a sideline angle, had to take a chance. He stated if they were playing at home, he probably sees the reply on the jumbotron and doesn't make that challenge. That makes sense to me so I will give him a pass on those.

[dieterbrock]

fans complaining about the rams' inept offense, the rams' inability to score points, the rams' 32nd ranking in offensive scoring through 4 games this season, and their 31st ranking last season, aren't complaining because they think a 27-14 win looks cooler than a 9-3 win, or because they think a convincing win counts more in the standings than a close win, they're complaining because a lack of offense and squeaker wins doesn't bode well going forward, historically it's not a recipe for a successful season.

Well said.
3-1 is great but even an "optimist" has to realize that for the season being outscored 76-63 is not a recipe for success. At their current pace of a 5 point win, it will take 3 more victories in the next 3 games to get over the hump and be outscoring the oppostion

[Elmgrovegnome]

I agree with the OP. I celebrated the win over the Cardinals three times. Once when Barron intercepted and downed the ball (wish had ran toward the end zone), again with Tru's international, and then lastly when the actually did win. How many teams struggle to hold the ball after that first Barron interception? Not one first down? Not one pass? No sideline route that can safely be thrown away if needed? Instead three runs when Arizona had the time outs to stop the clock. Does Fisher still have his balls? He talks tough but he doesn't coach.

[PARAM]

I watch all of the Chuck Knox years, in person, and not only was that a very different league back then (much lower scoring), but we dominated teams in the regular season. Still, Knox's 3yrds and a cloud of dust was not powerful enough to get us to the Show.

Now, we have a similar style of offense, but in a league where teams can move the ball and score. I just don't see how we compete on an ongoing basis. And I don't hold much faith in this 3-1 record that we currently have, as I don't really see it as an indicator of our capability.

We're competing with defense and strong special teams in an offensive league. And it'll be like that until Goff moves under center.....if Goff proves capable of being 'that guy' under center. I remember the Knox era, the Malavasi era and the Robinson era which were all run heavy until Ferragamo and Everett emerged. And that still wasn't enough.

I read things like "we can't expect a deep playoff run". Just getting to the playoffs would be a beginning. That's not settling for mediocrity, it's accepting improvement in small doses. I read things about "Fisher's game management" and I think back to Martz's game management. I'll take Martz's offense over Fisher's but I'll take Fisher's game management over Martz's.

Bottom line is this. It's the NFL. It's tough to build a consistent winner. Usually, it's hand in hand with a good QB. And it doesn't happen overnight and continue on for years. Just look at the GSOT. The perfect storm. A flash in the pan. 3 years. Soft. Tough, physical defenses gave them fits....Tampa, Tennessee, New England. Some fans thought they should have won a handful of Superbowls and when it was all said and done, in reality, they were lucky to win one.

Fans want a consistent winner. A perennial playoff participant, in the tourney to win a Superbowl year in and year out. It's tough. Green Bay with Rodgers at the helm has 1 Lombardi. The Saints with Brees have 1 Lombardi. Indy with Manning; the Rams with the GSOT, 1 Lombardi. Pittsburgh with Roethlisberger 2....none since the 2008 season. New England with Brady and a different group of receivers practically each time, 4. Is that Brady or Bellichick? Was Pittsburgh Ben or that defense?

I believe in defense. Yes you need to score. You need a quality QB and offense. But you need defense. Denver last year won with the shell of Peyton Manning. They probably could have won with Osweiller. Why? Defense. I don't know the answer to what we need to be perennial playoff participants but I think it will start with defense. I think it will include Goff (if he's the real deal). And I think it's close. But then that's just one fan's opinion.

[Hacksaw]

Considering this is supposed to be a running team, something seems off. Like we can't run (at least up the middle).
Is it CK's arm or the overall lack of passing production, or is Gurley having a sophomore slump?

And not to be nitpicky, but shouldn't the thread title read 'Despite' Jeff Fisher? I doubt that he wanted to lose and the team decided to win anyway. Just sayin'..

[Stranger]

I remember the Knox era, the Malavasi era and the Robinson era which were all run heavy until Ferragamo and Everett emerged.

Yup, was there for every one of those games as well.

I guess one could argue over cause and effect with these various coaches. Was it the QB that emerged, and then the HC turned-up the offense? Or, was it the coach that found and developed a QB around a higher octane O. With Malavasi, I'd say it was definitely the HC & OC who turned up that offense.

I am now absolutely convinced that Fisher will never ever create a machine that can consistently score over 20pts/game, Goff or otherwise.

I read things like "we can't expect a deep playoff run". Just getting to the playoffs would be a beginning. That's not settling for mediocrity, it's accepting improvement in small doses. I read things about "Fisher's game management" and I think back to Martz's game management. I'll take Martz's offense over Fisher's but I'll take Fisher's game management over Martz's.

I guess what I'm saying is that "just getting to the playoffs" is most likely the ceiling for this coaching staff. That's the difference for me. That's why I'm off the Kool-aid, and looking wishfully for a change in administration.

[Rams the Legends live on]

That's why I'm off the Kool-aid, and looking wishfully for a change in administration.

So agree with that......LOL Good to see ya Stranger hope all is well for ya bro

[Rams the Legends live on]

What I am hoping is Fish will have a light click on. These wins and this stretch in my opinion should be proof to him that his offensive ideology is dead and has gone the way of the dinosaurs. We have no run game which he believes you need to emphasis. We are winning games with a pitiful running game and a meager passing game we are winning and scoring our points in the air. Maybe Fish will spite himself and learn a lesson over this stretch and the light click on, hey ya can win games in today's NFL by having a passing game.

[69superbowl]

The only person who can change Fisher's game strategy is E. Stash, and I'll betcha things are pretty jolly in the velvet lined suite right about not. Fisher is doing exactly what he was hired to do: Establish stability as a head coach after the carnival acts that preceded him; Bring toughness to a team chronically labelled as "soft"; re-build perhaps collective worst 53 man roster in the modern history of football and regain the respect and credibility that this franchise had enjoyed while in Los Angeles (so as to be marketable upon moving back to LA). I don't think the words "wins" or "playoffs" really mattered all that much to the owner when Fisher took over.

It was a tall mountain, whether we like the road taken or not, and he might just have pulled it off. Still a very frustrating team, but aren't we all having a lot more fun than a few years ago? Goff will get his shot. But if it is this year, it likely means these elusive wins have dried up (again).

[aeneas1]

The only person who can change Fisher's game strategy is E. Stash, and I'll betcha things are pretty jolly in the velvet lined suite right about not. Fisher is doing exactly what he was hired to do: Establish stability as a head coach after the carnival acts that preceded him; Bring toughness to a team chronically labelled as "soft"; re-build perhaps collective worst 53 man roster in the modern history of football and regain the respect and credibility that this franchise had enjoyed while in Los Angeles (so as to be marketable upon moving back to LA). I don't think the words "wins" or "playoffs" really mattered all that much to the owner when Fisher took over.

It was a tall mountain, whether we like the road taken or not, and he might just have pulled it off. Still a very frustrating team, but aren't we all having a lot more fun than a few years ago? Goff will get his shot. But if it is this year, it likely means these elusive wins have dried up (again).

kind of tough for me to see it that way... fisher was brought in to make the rams winners, yet after four years on the job the rams have been losers each and every season under fish, and unable to do what 26 other nfl teams have done over the last four years, win 8 or more games in a season... moreover i haven't seen the return to respectability that you mentioned, instead i've heard announcers chuckle on national tv over the rams "horizontal passing game", joke left and right about the rams' perpetual inability to score points, their anemic passing yards per game, and read/hear never-ending "typical fisher team" comments, "always around .500", "undisciplined", "bone-head penalties", "rarely make the postseason", etc., etc...

anyway it's a new year, the rams are sitting at 3-1, hopefully when the dust settles on the season the rams will have turned in a good one, a winning one.