[snackdaddy]

As for trading picks, it's worked for some and not others. But IMO each situation is independent of one another and only shows up in stats. The Rams have had there share of "extra picks" and what has it gotten us? We're still 7-9.

Yeah, I know we have more talented players under Fisher than his predecessor had. And we got a bevy of extra picks through the RGIII trade. But so far it looks like we're blowing a golden opportunity.

And how much talent do we really have? If someone wanted to tell me the Rams aren't that talented, how can I disagree based on the record? How can I debate that point? I mean, that talent has only achieved 4 straight losing seasons under Fisher.

You would think a more talented team would do better than that. Plus, how many pro bowlers has the talented Rams put out? We had three last season and one was the punter. Apparently the people who pick the pro bowlers don't think the Rams are all that talented.

We can say we have better players and we can come up with excuses why they're not winning. We can say there are extenuating circumstances that don't show up in the win/loss column. But are we being honest with ourselves? Or are we just being homers?

[PARAM]

Yeah, I know we have more talented players under Fisher than his predecessor had....

....And how much talent do we really have? If someone wanted to tell me the Rams aren't that talented, how can I disagree based on the record? How can I debate that point?....

....Plus, how many pro bowlers has the talented Rams put out? We had three last season and one was the punter. Apparently the people who pick the pro bowlers don't think the Rams are all that talented.....

....But are we being honest with ourselves? Or are we just being homers?

In 2015, we had more talent than we had the previous 10 seasons. Maybe more. Apparently not enough to achieve more than a sub .500 record. There are always holes to fill, it seems. Pro Bowlers? I never liked that argument when we didn't have pro bowlers. Remember it?

Q: How many pro bowlers have the Rams drafted since _____?
A: None

The people who pick the pro bowlers do it in two ways.
They reward sustained personal success....as in 'that guy is one of the better _____ in the league. Has been for a while'.
And they reward team success. 'Those guys put together a great season and ______ was a big part of it'.

It's both an award show and a popularity contest.And in my humble opinion, a totally unnecessary game. Keep the awards, forget the game. But that would cost the NFL some bucks.

But......even if we had two rookies of the year two years in a row, they are both of our pro bowlers, along with our punter, who gets to showcase his talent more often than most of his competition.So 3 guys have won 5 awards so to speak.

That being said, it's clear to this Ram fan our talent level seems to have been increase four fold since Fisher has been around. But there's still a way to go and he's running out of time. I'm being honest with myself.....at least I think I am.

[snackdaddy]

Yeah, I know we have more talented players under Fisher than his predecessor had....

....And how much talent do we really have? If someone wanted to tell me the Rams aren't that talented, how can I disagree based on the record? How can I debate that point?....

....Plus, how many pro bowlers has the talented Rams put out? We had three last season and one was the punter. Apparently the people who pick the pro bowlers don't think the Rams are all that talented.....

....But are we being honest with ourselves? Or are we just being homers?

In 2015, we had more talent than we had the previous 10 seasons. Maybe more. Apparently not enough to achieve more than a sub .500 record. There are always holes to fill, it seems. Pro Bowlers? I never liked that argument when we didn't have pro bowlers. Remember it?

Q: How many pro bowlers have the Rams drafted since _____?
A: None

The people who pick the pro bowlers do it in two ways.
They reward sustained personal success....as in 'that guy is one of the better _____ in the league. Has been for a while'.
And they reward team success. 'Those guys put together a great season and ______ was a big part of it'.

It's both an award show and a popularity contest.And in my humble opinion, a totally unnecessary game. Keep the awards, forget the game. But that would cost the NFL some bucks.

But......even if we had two rookies of the year two years in a row, they are both of our pro bowlers, along with our punter, who gets to showcase his talent more often than most of his competition.So 3 guys have won 5 awards so to speak.

That being said, it's clear to this Ram fan our talent level seems to have been increase four fold since Fisher has been around. But there's still a way to go and he's running out of time. I'm being honest with myself.....at least I think I am.

I do believe we have more talent that we've had in a long time. The problem is, that talent is not equating to winning game. If I told a Cardinals fan "My team has more talent than yours", he'd probably tell me "Fine, you keep your talent and I'll keep my division titles and playoffs".

[/zn/]

I do believe we have more talent that we've had in a long time. The problem is, that talent is not equating to winning game. If I told a Cardinals fan "My team has more talent than yours", he'd probably tell me "Fine, you keep your talent and I'll keep my division titles and playoffs".

The issue isn't talent, it's injuries.

Ask a Cards fan if they would like to have the Rams record of injuries.

If he says the wrong thing by going on about "how all teams have injuries," then quickly set him straight by pointing the real issue---no not all teams have injuries that demolish entire key units. In the Rams case, on offense.

So ask if he would like to have (1) Rams injuries (plus meltdown) at qb and (2) Rams injuries and then young replacements on the OL.

In other words, ask if he would like to have at most 11 games in the last 3 years where they had either a healthy starting-caliber qb or a new starting-caliber qb who had not yet melted down. In other words, that's 37 games with either a #2 caliber qb or a melted down Foles. For 32 of those games they had either an injury damaged line, a new YOUNG line, or both.

"The record" to me is never an answer, it's a question. What caused this record? My football-lite college age daughter could look at W/L columns and leap to conclusions. Knowing what actually happened and what caused the record depends on knowing the team and what happened.

.

[PARAM]

The issue isn't talent, it's injuries.

Ask a Cards fan if they would like to have the Rams record of injuries.

If he says the wrong thing by going on about "how all teams have injuries," then quickly set him straight by pointing the real issue---no not all teams have injuries that demolish entire key units. In the Rams case, on offense.

So ask if he would like to have (1) Rams injuries (plus meltdown) at qb and (2) Rams injuries and then young replacements on the OL.

In other words, ask if he would like to have at most 11 games in the last 3 years where they had either a healthy starting-caliber qb or a new starting-caliber qb who had not yet melted down. In other words, that's 37 games with either a #2 caliber qb or a melted down Foles. For 32 of those games they had either an injury damaged line, a new YOUNG line, or both.

The starting line, game by game:

#1-#5 GRob, Brown, Barnes, Saffold, Havenstein
#6-#7 GRob, Brown, Barnes, Reynolds, Havenstein
(4-3 record)

#8 GRob, Brown, Barnes, Donnell, Reynolds
#9 GRob, Brown, Barnes, Reynolds, Havenstein
#10 GRob, Wichmann, Barnes, Donnell, Reynolds
#11 GRob Wichmann, Barnes, Rainey, Reynolds
(0-4 record)

#12-#16 GRob, Wichmann, Barnes, Reynolds, Havenstein
(3-2 record)

Note: Not only did Foles performance suffer after game #7 but Gurley's did also. From game 8 - game 12 (Havenstein's return), he ran the ball 79 times for 260 yards (3.3 avg). In his next 3 he gained 271 yards on 56 carries (4.8 avg), though he sat out the week 17 loss at SF. Whomever is under center for Los Ramos in 2016, a WR like Laquan Treadwell would go a long way towards his success.

[HAL 9000]

The starting line, game by game:

#1-#5 GRob, Brown, Barnes, Saffold, Havenstein
#6-#7 GRob, Brown, Barnes, Reynolds, Havenstein
(4-3 record)

#8 GRob, Brown, Barnes, Donnell, Reynolds
#9 GRob, Brown, Barnes, Reynolds, Havenstein
#10 GRob, Wichmann, Barnes, Donnell, Reynolds
#11 GRob Wichmann, Barnes, Rainey, Reynolds
(0-4 record)

#12-#16 GRob, Wichmann, Barnes, Reynolds, Havenstein
(3-2 record)

Note: Not only did Foles performance suffer after game #7 but Gurley's did also. From game 8 - game 12 (Havenstein's return), he ran the ball 79 times for 260 yards (3.3 avg). In his next 3 he gained 271 yards on 56 carries (4.8 avg), though he sat out the week 17 loss at SF. Whomever is under center for Los Ramos in 2016, a WR like Laquan Treadwell would go a long way towards his success.

Good stuff PARAM. Havenstein is a difference maker. Hopefully Brown can improve like I think he can. Crossing my fingers that Safold can hold up but I'm not counting on it, nor should the Rams.

[OldSchool]

Interesting stuff PAR. I thought Reynolds was plugged in at lg though next to GRob at the end of the year and that's when we started to see improvement from him.

[PARAM]

Interesting stuff PAR. I thought Reynolds was plugged in at lg though next to GRob at the end of the year and that's when we started to see improvement from him.

He was. The bottom line is, Havenstein got better as the year progressed. Brown was playing well when he was injured. And Wichmann was playing well next to Havenstein. But we had those same old injury problems along the line all year. Sooner or later, we're gonna see 5 or 6 guys play all 16 games and I hope for our QB's sake, whomever that may be, it's the youngsters we drafted this year, GRob and Reynolds as the swing man. Donell only started 2 games around a week on the bench. I don't remember whether he did or didn't do well.

[/zn/]

Sooner or later, we're gonna see 5 or 6 guys play all 16 games ... Donell only started 2 games around a week on the bench. I don't remember whether he did or didn't do well.

Donnal played poorly if I recall. In terms of eventually not seeing the traditional Rams 476 linemen lost per season routine...yes that has to happen some day, the odds alone dictate it. And it will make a big difference, I agree.

...