Grading the Rams: Week 11 vs. Arizona

I disagree with your grading of Bulger.

He made great throws today down the field. That pass to Amendola was perfect, and so were his passes to Donnie. That fade he threw to Donnie on 4th and 4 was perfect too, but the refs didn’t call PI. I know Bulger threw some bad passes, and dropped the ball for no reason in the 1st quarter, but a C- seems a little harsh. The reason the Rams got back in this game was NOT Steven Jackson, but Bulger running a proper West Coast Offense for the first time this season. Quick throws to Danny, Donnie, and Gibson had this offense moving. The Ram’s lost the battle on both sides of the trenches, and our running game was MIA minus that long run that Steven Jackson had. Can’t fault him for not being able to drive 80 yards in 1 minute without timeouts. Even Peyton Manning would have a hard time doing that. If the refs call PI, or if Gibson makes a catch, or if Steven Jackson was able to convert on that 4th down, or if the Ram’s D didn’t allow an average of 6.6 yards per running play, the Rams win this game. I would give Bulger a B-.

by jb22 on Nov 22, 2009 7:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Sure

but how much of the success of the classical style of WC offense was on the playcalling? How many throws did Bulger miss? Bear in mind I didn’t put him in the D range…

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 7:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I have to disagree with you on Bulger too

not the grade, but adding, “and he certainly didn’t put the team on his back for a last gasp drive.” C’mon now, you know very well that he was a little more then shaken up on that sack by Dockett.

Saying he couldn’t do anything because he was injured is a low blow.

I believe in 2010

by ram_rod on Nov 22, 2009 8:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

His brain was still sloshing around in his cranuim in the huddle

And his arm/shoulder was hanging kinda limp too.

by CoachConnors on Nov 23, 2009 11:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think it was his hamstring, right?

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.

by Tackle Box on Nov 23, 2009 3:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Good grades...

…Marc had a rough first half, but the second half was much better for not only him, but the defense/S-Jax/O-line. We need a DL help fast. Warner had as much fun surveying the Dome’s interior during the game as he did during the pre-game warm ups.

Bulger’s pass to Amendola was the play of the day IMO. Amazing throw into double coverage, amazing grab by Danny. I love how he bounced back from dropping a BIG ONE last week (a much easier grab too) to catching an arguably bigger one this week (which was much more difficult despite good placement).

Also, I think Marc deserves a slightly better grade. C-C+ might have been more accurate when I think about that throw.

Go Rams!!!

"I was just letting the shots fly. You know, I don't leave any bullets in the chamber."

"Everything negative- pressure, challenges- is all an opportunity for me to rise."

-Kobe Bryant

A mantra for all athletes.

by TrojanRam on Nov 22, 2009 7:50 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

That play

was more on Danny that on Bulger. Great grab.

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 7:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Umm...

…No. I respectfully disagree. It was a pinpoint laser between two defenders. The fact that he let that one go is amazing. It was an equally great play on both their parts IMO, and it was a CRUCIAL 4th and 17 conversion.

"I was just letting the shots fly. You know, I don't leave any bullets in the chamber."

"Everything negative- pressure, challenges- is all an opportunity for me to rise."

-Kobe Bryant

A mantra for all athletes.

by TrojanRam on Nov 22, 2009 8:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

The pass was exactly where it needed to be.

It was more courage than anything on Danny’s part, to go up high across the middle. The catch itself wasn’t very difficult, it was the holding on to the ball while taking the inevitable hit for exposing himself across the middle. The hit could have been a lot harder too.

by jb22 on Nov 22, 2009 8:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I hate getting these huge 4th down conversions late in the game

and then end up losing the game anyway make a meaningful play and win the game. Stop getting my hopes up and then tearing them away.

The 53 as one have become the 53 that won.

by Carneros on Nov 22, 2009 8:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree as well.

Great catch, but an even better throw.

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.

by Tackle Box on Nov 23, 2009 7:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

on the bright side

we ran a bubble screen for positive yardage today. Seriously, not kidding but that might be a first.

by jb22 on Nov 22, 2009 7:53 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

What?

The combination of Avery and Gibson produced just behind what Fitzgerald and Boldin did

Are we looking at the same box score? Fitz and Boldin had 190 and two TDs on 16 catches.

Gibson and Avery had 126 yards with no TDs on 9 catches.

In fact, even if you add Amendola’s stats (61 yards on 4 catches) the Rams WRs were still out gained (190 to 187), out TDed (2 to 0), and had fewer catches (16 to 13). In no way did Avery and Gibson produce just behind Fitz and Boldin. To add to the discrepancy, Fitz and Boldin had 16 catches on 21 targets (76%). Avery and Gibson produced only 9 catches on 24 targets (37%). In other words, the Rams WRs had 7 less catches on 3 more targets. Fitz and Boldin significantly out performed the Rams receivers in every aspect of the game.

Its kind of hard to take this post seriously when it is very clear you have done little to no research and are basing your grades on pure conjecture.

by BigMac545 on Nov 22, 2009 7:59 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Cmon

  Little to no research? Besides watching the game and then looking at multiple sources’ evaluations of the numbers? I’ll take criticism, but at least make it reasonable.
  What was the real difference between the two pairs? A single TD. That’s it. If either Gibson or Avery had converted their chance at a TD, the pair would have produced similar outputs. Sure, you can looks at the discrepancy in yardage, but how much of that was really on Fitz and Boldin’s game versus what Warner fed them?
  The only real separation between the games Avery+Gibson put on the field compared to what Fitz+Boldin did was the two drops in the end zone for Avery and Gibson. It’s kind of hard to take your comment seriously when it’s very clear you ignore the research and are basing your comment on simple statistical analysis.

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 8:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You prove my point...

What was the real difference between the two pairs? A single TD.

Fitz and Boldin had one TD each. So, two TD’s, not one separated Boldin and Fitz from Avery and Gibby.

If either Gibson or Avery had converted their chance at a TD, the pair would have produced similar outputs

So basically what you are saying is IF Avery and Gibson had played better and put up better numbers, then they would have been about the same as Fitz and Boldin? Well, I agree with that. IF they had each scored a TD, IF they had caught a greater percentage of their targets, IF they had more yards, then they would have produced at a level just behind Fitz and Boldin. But none of those things happened.

I will give you that Avery was PIed in the end zone on a very good route, but Gibson dropped what could have been a game tying TD on top of a few other passes earlier in the game was well. Again, in no sense did those two play anywhere close to the same level as Boldin and Fitz. The Cardinals passing game dominated in the first half and the only reason it slowed down, and the only reason the Rams got back into the game was because Warner got a concussion and was replaced with Leinart.

by BigMac545 on Nov 22, 2009 8:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree on the front, agree on the back

To start at the end, if Warner had played the whole game, I think the gap between their play would have been wider. Warner showed an obvious level of comfort that Leinart did not, and I think a full half of football on top of what they showed would have reiterated the Fitzgerald/Boldin meme on the Rams.
Still, I stand by my assessment that Avery and Gibson produced just behind Fitz/Boldin. Had one of them caught the TD and we had converted a 2-point, say on a conversion to Jackson, would we even be having this argument?

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 8:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not much love for you tonight 3k

I believe in 2010

by ram_rod on Nov 22, 2009 8:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I can deal with it

Easier to face the masses than the replay of the Rams. Besides, you’re never going to get everyone to agree with you, especially when you’re grading your team after losing.

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 8:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

On a positive note

Steven Jackson is now second in the league in rushing yards with 1031 yards.

[Chris Johnson is first with 1091, and the Titans haven’t even played yet.
(vs. Houston on MNF)]

by jb22 on Nov 22, 2009 8:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Tonight

marked the first time in his career he’s gone four straight games with 100+ yards rushing. It’s damn near impossible to get the MVP in major sports on a losing team, but he’s got to be in the race.

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 9:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

He's going to need more TDs I would think

The 53 as one have become the 53 that won.

by Carneros on Nov 22, 2009 9:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sure

but to be in the mix at this point is impressive

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 9:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Uh, he has no chance

Brett Favre.

No way he doesn’t win. He has the league by the balls, and he’s playing excellent.

I believe in 2010

by ram_rod on Nov 23, 2009 12:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That's basically what I was saying without saying it

He has little to no chance. Someone from the Vikings will win it. Whether it is AP, Jared Allen, or Brett Favre, a Viking will win it.

I honestly don’t even think he’s in the mix. How many MVPs do you know that came off a 1-15 to 3-13 teams.

The 53 as one have become the 53 that won.

by Carneros on Nov 23, 2009 7:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No coaching grade?

There was a fairly controversial call made on whether to go for a TD or FG. Spags went for the FG and had we gotten the TD and a 2pt conversion we could have tied it with a field goal instead of failing on two fade routes at the end. While I think this is the wrong decision, I can’t really blame him for it, and we should have been able to score that last TD. We didn’t because our players didn’t execute and the playcalling was bad on the last couple of plays of our last real drive before the 1 minute drive. Two failed fade route in a row? One on fourth down? How about not running a play that works about 1 in every 5 times on 4th down in a critical point in the game. I give Spags a B- and Shurmur a D. Flajole B. Coaching overall C. (that probably doesn’t add up but Shurmur brought down to B’s to a C. I’m seriously, I hate him.

The 53 as one have become the 53 that won.

by Carneros on Nov 22, 2009 9:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

i don't blame him for kicking the FG

the Ram’s offense wasn’t really rolling at that point. They got down there because of Steven Jackson’s one long run, and after that they were completely stuffed. If the offense had been clicking all through the drive, it becomes easier to make that decision to go for it on 4th down.

Also, it was still early in the game, with a lot of time left. Spags played it safe, and kicked the FG which kept us in the game. It was the right call. As fans, we always want to see us go for it on 4th down, especially in the red zone, but the way the offense was going on that drive, it would have been sacrificing 3 points just to say that we went down swinging. Remember, there are no moral victories in the NFL. you play to win the game, and you make the decisions based on that.

by jb22 on Nov 22, 2009 10:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think I've only graded the coaches once

It leaves better discussion routes for the week ahead

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 10:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

uh about the DB"s,

they got absolutely smoked in the first half. If Warner had been in longer, it would have gotten even worse

by loyal2therams on Nov 22, 2009 10:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't say they got smoked

You can’t expect a secondary to cover WRs for as long as Warner had time when he was in

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 10:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

True,

but at times there were too many quick completions in a row

by loyal2therams on Nov 22, 2009 10:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Sure

but if you’re grading a team against defending Arizona’s passing attack on quick 5 yard passes, you’ll always get between a D+ a F

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 10:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Just read this online

“In unofficial pressbox statistics, Brandon Gibson was targeted 17 times.”

by jb22 on Nov 22, 2009 10:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

wow

i passed out in the 1st quarter after a Arizona touchdown. I knew he was threw to a lot but wow and he had like what 6 or 7 catches? Still think he has a promising career though.

And on a side note anyone catch my boy Forrest Griffin last night?

by keeperskillz24 on Nov 22, 2009 11:25 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Cmon

It was Tito Ortiz. Step your game up.

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 11:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought there were three major weak points

for the Rams this week.

First, the timing between Bulger and the WRs was terrible. Either the ball was late or early, or not in the place the WR ended up. I don’t know whose fault it was, but the problem was there all day. The occasional pinpoint pass only made the bad ones more obvious.

Second, our DLine just got gashed by the Cardinals running game. Most ot the time the Cardinals could do what they wanted and we didn’t put up much resistance. We have to improve this group significantly.

Third, the OLine was very disappointing today. They simply couldn’t move the Arizona defense. Third down and one, Jackson gains nothing. Fourth and one and he again gains nothing. They made no holes, nor did they move anyone backwards. After Jackson’s long run, first and goal on the four. The OLine can’t create any holes and the offense goes nowhere again. They just looked soft today. And Goldberg picked up some big penalties today. How did he get incognito disease?

Let’s face it, the Rams would have been blown out if Warner could have played the second half. Very sad.

by andyrose on Nov 22, 2009 11:50 PM CST reply actions 1 recs

Rec'd

That’s pretty much the summary of the game, no?

You don't seem to want to accept the fact you're dealing with an expert in guerrilla warfare, with a man who's the best, with guns, with knives, with his bare hands. A man who's been trained to ignore pain, ignore weather, to live off the land, to eat things that would make a billy goat puke. In *St. Louis* his job was to dispose of enemy personnel. To kill! Period! Win by attrition. Well, *Steven Jackson* was the best.

by 3k on Nov 22, 2009 11:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Let's face it-

The Rams may have been blown out? speaking of hypo’s, the Cards might have been blown out if we didn’t have 9 of our best on IR. We did pretty good with what we had. Our weakness has always been the deep ball—Draft for D’s in 2010!

by Knoxfan on Nov 23, 2009 12:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

2010 draft......needs

1st round-Suh, 2nd round- Keenum(if he declares), 3rd round- Muckelroy….that would be a good start for the draft

by Danteslion on Nov 23, 2009 12:45 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I'm cool with all your grades.

I said in an earlier post this week that it would probably take 28 points to win and that going for FG’s would be one sure way to get beat. Our coaching staff exhibited NO guts. A 1-9 team must be bold. But, then again the season is way lost and we need high draft picks. That’s all I can figure. I’ll be satisfied if we can just somehow knock off Sheattle and/or SF. btw. Chris Long got another sack, but it was his ONLY tackle. He obviously can’t find the QB or the ball carrier. And, we only converted 25% of our 3rd down plays (while Ari made 55% without Kurt Warner for a half). That’s not a winning formulae.

by edpjr on Nov 23, 2009 1:25 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Long had limited playing time

I’m not sure how limited but it may have contributed to his lack of tackles.

The 53 as one have become the 53 that won.

by Carneros on Nov 23, 2009 7:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think Long played decent

He may have only gotten 1 sack but I saw him get extremely close to sacking Warner on 2 different plays. Warner just stepped in and threw a laser. I’m still high on Brandon Gibson and his potential. It’s becoming more and more clear to me that the Rams need either QB or a DT. A DL would be a much safer pick in my opinion depending on our spot in the draft.

It’s all good guys 2 weeks in a row we took it down to the wire and we have the Seafags coming to town next so we should DEFINITELY win that 1

by revrue914 on Nov 23, 2009 1:35 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

You would think so...

…but Baldy and the Sea hags have beaten us like 7-8 times in a row. They seem to have our number. I hope we break the jinx this time. Their season is over too. And, if we can defeat the 40 whiners, we can finish off any remote playoff chances they might have.

by edpjr on Nov 23, 2009 2:07 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

1st Pick

1) Quarterback : it should, by now, be obvious why this should be our #1 pick. But how about if we do it for no other reason than it’s NOT the safer choice.
2) Defensive Tackle : let’s try this again. But maybe in the 2nd round we’ll get it right. (besides….Spags has a reputation for that).
3) Wide Receiver : probably better off looking at the free agents.
…..of course if we could somehow “stockpile” picks this should change.
But that’s not going to happen.

by ZamRam on Nov 23, 2009 9:34 AM CST via mobile reply actions 0 recs

idk...

if getting a wider receiver in the 3 round where he would be a #2 or #3 guy more than likely would help us…..all of are WR’s are #2 or #3 guys so if we are going to get a WR in the offseason we need to make sure hes a #1 receiver and i dont think you find that in the 3rd round if you recall we drafted avery in the 2nd

by Danteslion on Nov 23, 2009 10:09 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Timing between Bulger and the WRs - mutual thing

The timing between a QB and his WR’s is a mutual thing that you can’t lay on the QB entirely. Its not even somuch as a blame thing as it is something that grows with reps together. When you factor in the WR’s being in experienced, you can add a little more responsibility on them for why it isn’t perfect (or good). But it’s not really something you think of “blame”.

There’s a lot that goes into it, including reading the D correctly (for both QB and WRs) and the work the WR has been doing to set up his CB in the previous plays. It takes a WR sometimes half a game to set up his CB properly, and make him think he knows what the WR is going to do. In that time, the timing on different routes can vary a little bit.

by CoachConnors on Nov 23, 2009 11:43 AM CST reply actions 0 recs