clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Bruce or Holt? The Zygmunt Legacy lives on

New, comments

Watching Isaac Bruce play like, well, like Isaac Bruce in this Sunday's latest disappointment, I started thinking about the decision to hand Bruce his walking papers. Vintage Jay Zygmunt, with help from Linehan no doubt. As Bruce, who most people questioned as a #1 WR, cemented his place in history, I wondered if the Rams maybe cut the wrong Turf Show wide receiver. Given Torry Holt's performance this season, it's an easy argument to make. 

Let's set aside the financial aspects of the decision, and consider it on purely based on team needs. In case you hadn't noticed, the Rams don't pass to the middle of the field anymore. Those routes belonged to Bruce, and with McMichael out, the Rams lack a guy who specializes in that area, the curl routes in particular. The play calling has been white bread at best, and they never throw to the middle of the field anymore, making it much easier to defend. Avery, and to a lesser extent the others, runs the post and other deep routes fine, and would likely run it better with defensive backs forced to account for the middle.

There's also the question as to who has more left in the tank. I wonder if Bruce, with 4 years seniority, doesn't have the fresher legs this season...unless the Rams have just been so bad you can't really tell. Bruce has around 100 more yards receiving than Holt on about the same number of receptions. Holt has 3 TDs; Bruce has 7. 

Oh well, it's all academic at this point, and Bruce or Holt or even Randy Moss wouldn't have been the difference between the current incarnation of the Rams and somewhere closer to .500. Still, it's an interesting "what if" now that we can look back on the Jay Zygmunt era, secure in the knowledge that it's over.