[ScottyD]

After the Rams planned on staying and practicing in Colorado Springs to get ready for the high elevation in Mexico City-I expected and kinda hoped we would stay in the colder East after the Detroit game to practice outside in preparation for the Bears game in Chicago. Course that may be self centered on my part-I sure would like to go home for a few days myself to sleep in my own bed. But it would have been a good idea. The weather is gonna be brutal this Sunday night-that's for sure!

[Elvis]

[aeneas1]

assuming no snow or high winds, i think the chicago defense at home is more of a concern than the weather.

the bears are 5-1 in chicago and have given up an average of just 17 offensive points per game at soldier - the most offensive points they've given up in a single game at home is just 24, to the patriots, which was the bears sole home loss.

opposing qbs are averaging a lowly 78.7 qb rating in chicago while completing just 62% of their passes.

[AvengerRam]

I think that an interesting side question will be... can the Rams win a low-scoring, physical, defense-oriented contest (like they did against Tampa in the 1999/2000 playoffs).

[/zn/]

and what are the next "not good enough yet" bars we can look forward to? not good enough yet to win a postseason game? a thanksgiving game? a postseason game when trailing in the 4th? a rainy road game? a night game in october? the super bowl? the super bowl when trailing?

Except no one said any of those things. That's you driving yourself crazy with imaginary stuff so you can tell people they can't say things they haven't said.

[/zn/]

I agree with Max. It's more likely Goff has a sub 100 rating in bitter cold against a good defense. But that by no means is an indication of the result of the game.

Yeah, in the last 2 years when Goff has had a qb rating in the 80s or lower, they won 5 out of those 7 games.

[aeneas1]

Except no one said any of those things. That's you driving yourself crazy with imaginary stuff so you can tell people they can't say things they haven't said.

exactly what color is the sky in your world?

[aeneas1]

I think that an interesting side question will be... can the Rams win a low-scoring, physical, defense-oriented contest (like they did against Tampa in the 1999/2000 playoffs).

that's kinda what they did this past sunday, no? it was a 16-13 game after 3 and a half quarters, of course it wasn't against a particularly good team... the donkeys game kinda qualifies too, a 23-20 win, but like the lions game it wasn't exactly against a league powerhouse... last year the rams came up short in a 10-16 defensive battle against the seahawks, altho the seahawks finished the year 15th in offensive points scored and 14th in offensive points allowed.

fwiw, the rams have faced only two top 5 defensive teams (in offensive points allowed) under mcvay, the 2017 vikes and jags, who ranked 1 & 2 respectively... the vikes game remains the biggest lopsided rams loss under mcvay (7-24), while the jags game was a 13-17 offensive affair, turned into a 27-17 rams win thanks to a blocked punt for a td and a kickoff return.

chicago game will be interesting.

[/zn/]

exactly what color is the sky in your world?

Not relevant. In our world here, no one said any of those things. So the question is, did they say them in your world?

[max]

assuming no snow or high winds, i think the chicago defense at home is more of a concern than the weather.

the bears are 5-1 in chicago and have given up an average of just 17 offensive points per game at soldier - the most offensive points they've given up in a single game at home is just 24, to the patriots, which was the bears sole home loss.

opposing qbs are averaging a lowly 78.7 qb rating in chicago while completing just 62% of their passes.

VirtualBox_2018-12-04_14-44-25.png

You put up a bunch of numbers that support my argument that we shouldn’t expect much from Goff in Chicago. And the cold weather won’t make it easier, likely will make it tougher wearing those gloves.

But you go on making your off the wall comments that have nothing to do with my argument.

It appears that you’re so blinded in love with Goff that you can’t have a thoughtful and dignified conversation about his difficulties.