clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

No quick fix at QB for the Rams

New, comment

Bulger's name is lighting up the message boards today, as expected. Some calling for the Rams to bench him, some defending him and some just plaing calling for his head.

In all honesty, Bulger's no worse than the rest of the Rams' options at QB. Bringing in Green or Berlin might have a temporary effect, lifting QB play for a drive or two before going south in a hurry with no umph in the running game and playing behind a paper thin offensive line. Like I said, at this point putting a QB back there might be considered manslaughter. Bulger still is the best QB on the roster. Despite not reflecting that fact on possession after possession this week, he did throw for 300+ yards a week ago against the Pats and the week before that he completed 72% of his passes for a 118.5 passer rating against Dallas.

Here's ESPN's Mike Sando on the situation:

He'll struggle when the running game isn't there, but bailing on him would do more harm than good. Bulger can still be an accurate passer. He needs better protection and a better supporting cast overall. Bulger might need a full season with solid protection to recapture what he once had.

And here's his take on C Nick Leckey:

Brett Romberg gives the Rams another option, but changes at center can throw off timing and coordination. Is Romberg that much better than Leckey? Training camp failed to provide much evidence. Long-term help needed here.

While Bulger deserves some share of the blame for the offense's failures this weekend (can't blame that Rolle INT on anyone else), plenty of mitigating factors conspired against the QB. Switching from Romberg to Leckey, though, may not be that big of a deal. Bulger's worked with Romberg before, and I can't imagine timing, etc. to be a hurdle that can't be fairly easily overcome. Whether or not Romberg's better than Leckey is a good point though. Romberg played well down the stretch in 2006.

Too bad LeCharles Bentley wasn't healthy.