[aeneas1]

The Rams were 14-2 that season. They were the best team in the league. In the playoffs, they intercepted Brett Favre 6 times in a rout, and even outsmarted the Jim Johnson Philadelphia Eagles' vaunted defense. They darn well better be cocky and confident going into the Super Bowl. I want them to be those things.

Were they over-confident? Were they too cocky? Yeah, I suppose they were, but that can be a fine line.

Were they unprepared for New England's strategies and tactics that day? Yes, they absolutely were. That falls on the head coach. The Rams made an enormous adjustment at halftime of the NFC Championship game to beat the Eagles. They did not adjust to the Patriots' physical tactics during the Super Bowl. Again, adjustments fall on the head coach.

Nevertheless, it was a possession game and went down to the last second. Did the Patriots' foreknowledge of the Rams plays and gameplan make a difference in a game like that? You know it did. You're just saying that doesn't matter. It does matter.

the 2001 rams led the league in turnovers with a whopping 44, almost 3 per game, and they coughed it up 3 times in the super bowl, including 1 returned for a td, it sunk them... funny, some seem to think the gsot rams could overcome anything, including -3 turnover games, that just wasn't the case.

[moklerman]

the 2001 rams led the league in turnovers with a whopping 44, almost 3 per game, and they coughed it up 3 times in the super bowl, including 1 returned for a td, it sunk them... funny, some seem to think the gsot rams could overcome anything, including -3 turnover games, that just wasn't the case.

You're sending mixed signals. If they turned it over 3 times per game and went 16-2 before losing in the SB, it sure seems like they could overcome it.

[moklerman]

Wow!!! The righteousness is over powering!!! When a WR traps a ball instead of making a clean catch but comes up trying to make it look legit, is it cheating? If these fellows so bothered by cheating are consistent, it is. If an offensive lineman knowingly holds a defender, is it cheating if he isn't flagged? If a DB arrives a split second too early or grabs a WR is it cheating? Or if a WR blocks while setting a pick in a combination route is that cheating?

Come on fellows, HItler? Really. Lucifer? You're equating maintaining a competetive edge through slightly nefarious means (with respect to the rules of a GAME) the equivalent of human rights violations, murder and devil worship? Get real will ya. I've yet to see an athlete stand up and tell the umpire or referee they erred in their call and admit they didn't really make the play. Geesh!!! It's good to know there are people out there who fart and never blame it on the dog!

I think you know we're talking about two different things here.

Care to answer my card playing analogy? I'll add another example. If you go to a card game and there are cameras, marked cards and special glasses being used so that your opponent knows which cards you've got, are you okay with it?

[aeneas1]

You're sending mixed signals. If they turned it over 3 times per game and went 16-2 before losing in the SB, it sure seems like they could overcome it.

eh? the rams were -3 in the super bowl, thanks to 3 turnovers and no takeaways....

the gsot rams were 28-1 when even or better in turnover margin, with an average score of 35-17. they were 1-6 when -3 or more, with an average score of 25-32.

some seem to remember the gsot rams being invincible, immune to turnovers and turnover margins, it wasn't the case, see super bowl 36.

[moklerman]

eh? the rams were -3 in the super bowl, thanks to 3 turnovers and no takeaways....

the gsot rams were 28-1 when even or better in turnover margin, with an average score of 35-17. they were 1-6 when -3 or more, with an average score of 25-32.

some seem to remember the gsot rams being invincible, immune to turnovers and turnover margins, it wasn't the case, see super bowl 36.

I'm just going by what you said. You said they averaged 3 turnovers per game in 2001 but then said people shouldn't assume that they could overcome 3 turnovers in the SB. Or at least that's how I'm reading your quote.

[Stranger]

the 2001 rams led the league in turnovers with a whopping 44, almost 3 per game, and they coughed it up 3 times in the super bowl, including 1 returned for a td, it sunk them... funny, some seem to think the gsot rams could overcome anything, including -3 turnover games, that just wasn't the case.

Well, overcoming 3-turnovers is one thing. But overcoming:

• the NFL wanting the Patriots to win a 9/11 SB
• league officials allowing Patriot videographers in the stadium to record the pre-game walkthrough,
• the Refs looking the other way on every D-holding (mugging),
• Refs stopping the clock in the final drive when it clearly should have kept running,
• and lastly, I surmise allowing key Patriot defenders to access radio signals they should have not been allowed to access.

So, yeah, we were the best team in the league by far that year. And even with an enormous conspiracy to give the NFL a perfect PR story in a national tragedy shortened season, it still took them until the final seconds to squeak it out.

It was a monumental effort to get the Cheatriots into the game (can u say Raider's playoff's theft), and even a bigger effort to hand them the game.

And after all that, the king pin HC kept his mouth closed, paid a fine, and now is lauded by the NFL machine, while the HC who was robbed gets shut out for not being willing to keep him mouth shut. Welcome to corporate America, for all those who are not blinded by the Bernays propaganda machine.

[aeneas1]

the rams beat the patriots by just 1 score, a td, during the regular season when turnovers were even, but it's crazy to think the rams would lose to the patriots when -3? only a sophisticated conspiracy especially designed for 9/11 healing makes sense? really? heck, the rams were -2 against the giants in the regular season and lost, wait a minute....

[PARAM]

Did the Patriots' foreknowledge of the Rams plays and gameplan make a difference in a game like that? You know it did. You're just saying that doesn't matter. It does matter.

Did they have foreknowledge of the Rams plays and gameplan? Or did they have knowledge of their Red Zone plays? I seriously doubt they had knowledge of the gameplan. Does it matter? Sure it does. Should it have been enough to stop the team that scored 500+ points for the third straight season? IMHO, no.

[PARAM]

I think you know we're talking about two different things here.

Care to answer my card playing analogy? I'll add another example. If you go to a card game and there are cameras, marked cards and special glasses being used so that your opponent knows which cards you've got, are you okay with it?

Yeah two different things. You're comparing cards (for money) to football. It's gambling and in a past time, shooting someone for cheating at cards was a forgivable action. Hell it's hard enough to get the commissioner to suspend coaches for crap that happens on their watch. And you also found a way to bring Hitler into the conversation. That's not even two different things, it's two different realms.

Bottom line for me is this. You fail to see that in a sporting game.....baseball, hockey, football, basketball.....you try to gain any edge you can. If you have to hold somebody, interfere with somebody, steal signs or signals, you do it. It's all part of the game. If it's a close play, you play it like the call should go your way, even if you know it really shouldn't. Gamesmanship. It's not cheating if you don't get flagged or caught.

I agreed that filming a Red Zone walk through or deflating the football for a better grip is out of bounds. And it should be dealt with in a way that discourages future attempts. But I think if we go back to the very beginning of this discussion there were fans (you and others) who don't want an ex-Patriot or current Patriot to have anything to do with the Rams. Because they cheated. Sean Payton cheated and few held that against him when rumors connected him to the Rams head coaching job. There's no way he didn't have knowledge of Williams bounty program. Oh he may have pulled the 3 monkey approach but he knew damn right well what was going on with HIS team. Every great coach does.

My point is I want somebody in here who will do everything it takes to make the Rams perennial winners. I don't want them pulling the stuff the Patriots pulled and there's no reason to believe they will, just because they were associated with Belichick and Kraft. How about this here.....I'm tired of losing. I'm tired of watching 12 other teams play in January. I'm tired of fans wanting it accomplished "a certain way". Just do it. Win. Make the postseason. Win a trophy. I'll worry about how you did it, when it's done.

[PARAM]

the 2001 rams led the league in turnovers with a whopping 44, almost 3 per game, and they coughed it up 3 times in the super bowl, including 1 returned for a td, it sunk them... funny, some seem to think the gsot rams could overcome anything, including -3 turnover games, that just wasn't the case.

See that's the perception. The Rams did turn it over and won games when they were minus in that department. More than the NFL average by a considerable amount. So the perception is it didn't matter. And yet that was the 1 way to assure a loss. In fact it was the only way they lost. From 99-01 they didn't lose a game where they won the turnover battle. And they lost 1 game in 3 seasons when they were even in that department. So with those Rams, it was the single most important factor. When they won the turnover battle, they won the game. And yes, they were so good, they even won their fair share, a fairer share than the rest of the NFL, when they lost the turnover battle.

In 2001, they beat the niners with a -2, beat the Giants with a -2, beat the Jets with a -1, lost to the Saints with a -6, beat Carolina with a -1 and a -2 and lost to Tampa with a -4. So they were 5-2 when losing the turnover battle when the rest of the league was under .500. So fans thought that didn't matter. Except it did. And it does even more in the postseason because you're not playing any 1-15 Carolina teams. They could win when they lost that battle but they NEVER lost when they won that battle.