St. Louis Rams

blzhrpmd2 · PostOct 15, 2014#22512014-10-15T22:16+00:00

^Completely agree. Would make retention all the sweeter.

It's getting tougher to make excuses for Fisher these days. Poor ommunication, questionable scheme, execution failure, inconsistency, flat out bad play, and worse of all a regression from year to year. At some point a team has to be able to look at one aspect of the game and say we do "X" well. I don't see one facet of the game that the Rams succeed at or is no easily nulled by a coaching staff that has a clue.

Relocation and stadium issues aside, I wonder how Stan is feeling about his teams production these days. It's tough to find wins in the rest of the schedule and pulling out an unexpected victory only works if you have a defense.

DogtownBnR · PostOct 16, 2014#22522014-10-16T13:58+00:00

^ The Fisher/Snead era has been a failure and major disappointment so far. I think their plan to build the lines is a good one, but they appear to have drafted the wrong guys or they are VERY slow to develop. I've always believed that you draft playmakers and sign lineman as FA's, unless you have a can't miss guy like Pace or Ogden. Robinson may be good someday, but he had question marks on him, from scouts and draft gurus. To draft a guy #2 overall, he has to be can't-miss. The Rams have spent SO many picks on lineman over the years. Not many have panned out. When will they learn....?! EX) Jason Smith, Adam Carraker, Michael Brockers, Damian Lewis, Saffold, so on ...so on... Will Greg Robinson be added to that ugly list....? Too early, but the way Davis was scrambling Monday, has me worried.

Fisher and his staff have been less than impressive and their drafts are even worse. I think Stan needs to consider another direction, if things do not improve. I'd have to think he will give them at least one more year. Reports are that Stan loves Fisher, so he can do no wrong in Stan's eyes. I think we are stuck with this regime for a while, assuming they are in STL after this season.

RedOctober · PostOct 16, 2014#22532014-10-16T14:08+00:00

We have to remember Rams are still the youngest team overall in the NFL and will be for sometime. I do like Fisher i just wish he wouldn't of switched Defensive Coordinators like he did. So now what we are stuck with is a team thats having to relearn a entirely new scheme on defense. I wish we would have got Sam Watkins but that wasn't to be but I'm really starting to like how Quick is developing now. What hurts the Rams are the nonstop consistent penalties and until that stops then we'll continue to get pounded by other teams that are much more discipline.

DogtownBnR · PostOct 16, 2014#22542014-10-16T14:19+00:00

^Being the youngest team in the NFL is only of benefit, if those young guys develop into quality NFL players. I believe the Rams have been the youngest team for several years now. However, it has not led to a turnaround with the franchise. If the coaches are not developing all of this young talent, being the youngest team won't lead to much. Not to mention drafting. Who knows if any of these young guys will develop and if they do, will it be with the Rams or later in their careers.

dbInSouthCity · PostOct 17, 2014#22552014-10-17T17:57+00:00

NFL admits it- bad call on the Cook offensive interference call near the end of the first half

if you dont recall- Rams where up 14-3 with the ball...3 and 6, Davis hits Cook, he wrestles away from the 49ers defender, gets to the 49ers 25 yard line with about 1:40 to go. phantom flag is thrown, Rams punt and 49ers score a TD to make it 14-10 at Half time and they get the ball to start the 2nd. Reality should have been 17-3 Rams at half time worst case and best case 21-3

dweebe · PostOct 17, 2014#22562014-10-17T21:04+00:00

From instagram

richeisen
While landing, flew over Hollywood Park. Or what's left of it. An NFL stadium could certainly fit here.

http://instagram.com/p/uQ-4k-yVg1/

PostOct 20, 2014#22572014-10-20T02:45+00:00

Rams, Raiders would be Los Angeles bound -- if not for the NFL
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-foo ... or-the-nfl

The Raiders and Rams would both be formalizing plans to move to Los Angeles in 2015 if not for NFL intervention and the league's overriding control of the process, according to numerous sources with knowledge of the situation.

Both franchises continue to devote considerable time, energy and resources toward securing an eventual move. There is no lack of desire or intent by either club, sources said, however there is a fear of running afoul of the league office, which has made it explicitly clear to those clubs that no franchise will secure the 24 necessary votes to facilitate a relocation to LA without its stadium, property and development deals being approved by the NFL.

Both teams, whose current leases expire after the season, continue to actively seek solutions to their hurdles currently preventing them from moving to Southern California, sources said. “There are live discussions involving two clubs potentially relocating there,” as one source put it....

So, obviously, there remains significant work to be done. But the closer we get to the end of the season, and the closer the Rams and Raiders get to being free agents, the more things will crystallize. Neither would prefer to return to their current market if it's feasible to get to Los Angeles, and both will continue to work diligently to explore a means to make that happen, if not by 2015, then by as soon as possible thereafter.

blzhrpmd2 · PostOct 20, 2014#22582014-10-20T03:18+00:00

^The parlor game continues. Now it's becoming a direct you zig I zag press game. Burwell's article slowly picked up steam as the week went on, but this one will effectively kill it in the national press. I find it hard to believe that the "financially strapped" Raiders and Rams are working feverishly to escape their third world country markets. No one is losing any money in their current situation. Sure, a franchise will be more valuable in LA, but the same goes for any team not in NY. Yes, the Rams may leave, but there's no way it's this cut and dried without more information as to who all these sources are. As far as Eisen, that guy has been driving the bring back the NFL to LA bus for awhile.

To the playing field, today was finally a fun day in total at the dome. I heard an estimate of around 58,000 which is not so bad given the recent disappointments at home. Not a sellout, I realize, but there was some good energy in there, especially after the Austin and Bailey trickery, the sacks, and the fake punt. The defense still needs to tighten up the secondary, but I'll take the W over Seattle any day. Nice to see Tre Mason and Greg Robinson in there contributing consistently. Aaron Donald also looking like the real deal.

dweebe · PostOct 20, 2014#22592014-10-20T06:33+00:00

blzhrpmd2 wrote:To the playing field, today was finally a fun day in total at the dome. I heard an estimate of around 58,000 which is not so bad given the recent disappointments at home. Not a sellout, I realize, but there was some good energy in there, especially after the Austin and Bailey trickery, the sacks, and the fake punt. The defense still needs to tighten up the secondary, but I'll take the W over Seattle any day. Nice to see Tre Mason and Greg Robinson in there contributing consistently. Aaron Donald also looking like the real deal.

It was a good feeling even if a decent part of the crowd was Seahawks fans. In fact where we sat we were completely surrounded by Seattle fans. I'm not saying that figuratively but that on all four sides of us were Seahawks fans.

That included one younger couple in front of us where the gal wouldn't stop complaining. The Rams suck, the dome sucks, the fans suck, St. Louis sucks. Even worse since she had AT&T her cell phone was useless and she couldn't post all her crap to social media so that made her even angrier.

But there was a nice family behind us (they gave us their Quinn bobbleheads) and we talked St. Louis' issues along with the NBA or NHL in Seattle.

roger wyoming II · PostOct 20, 2014#22602014-10-20T13:33+00:00

^ Too bad we didn't beat the 49ers when we had such a good chance.... roll off a couple exciting wins like yesterday and that can draw locals in. Such a tough conference, too. Seattle & San Fran are finding out how tough it can be to keep on top with Arizona looking down on them right now.

dbInSouthCity · PostOct 20, 2014#22612014-10-20T14:49+00:00

Latest news is that the only thing that's keeping the Rams and Raiders from filling papers to move is the......NFL, the shield does not want any team moving into a temporary facility until the new stadium in LA is resolved and it will block any team from attempting to move....

goat314 · PostOct 20, 2014#22622014-10-20T15:00+00:00

^ I'm under the assumption that it will take LA a few years to get a stadium deal together. I'm also skeptical that an LA deal is a "done deal", the stadium deal hasn't even been officially approved, shovels have not even hit the ground, and like you said the NFL is not moving until a stadium is built.....could take years. The commissioner also said that he is committed to the St. Louis market about a year ago. If the Rams moved, we would become the largest market without the NFL. If the Raiders move, they still have the 49ers in the Bay Area.

This actually gives St. Louis leadership some time to get its act together and come up with a solid plan, whether that is the dome retrofit, a new riverfront stadium, or something at Earth City or Fenton, leadership needs to get its head out the can and realize how big a blow this will be to the region if we lose the Rams. Nothing says St. Louis is open for business like losing major sports franchises and race riots.

sirshankalot · PostOct 20, 2014#22632014-10-20T15:11+00:00

Stan is going to do what any businessman would do: play both markets against each other to achieve the greatest deal possible...AVOID THE NOISE

dbInSouthCity · PostOct 20, 2014#22642014-10-20T15:30+00:00

Correct, and i have no doubt that is happening in this case. Stan has to make some in roads with LA because if he doesn't get what he wants here, he will move... i think his choice is to stay here and work out and if it doesnt, Plan B is LA

pat · PostOct 20, 2014#22652014-10-20T17:50+00:00

^Heck of a Plan B isn't it?

Chalupas54 · PostOct 21, 2014#22662014-10-21T00:52+00:00

Wasn't there a story in the post a few days ago about how plans are being finalized privately for a riverfront stadium?

dweebe · PostOct 21, 2014#22672014-10-21T01:58+00:00

Chalupas54 wrote:Wasn't there a story in the post a few days ago about how plans are being finalized privately for a riverfront stadium?

Yup.

dweebe wrote:Burwell: Efforts under way to keep Rams here
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/ ... d2df2.html

...Clearly what has a lot of local NFL fans spooked are repeated vague media reports and political boasting coming out of LA in recent weeks that suggest the NFL wants two teams there within 12 to 24 months.

Naturally, everyone has the Rams on the short list — mainly because their lease with the Dome expires in January.

Over the past few weeks, I have heard informed local rumblings that tend to mute some of this Rams relocation chatter. In conversations with influential sources who are intimately familiar with the Rams’ stadium situation, they tell an entirely different story from the ones coming out of Los Angeles.

• While Kroenke might be reclusive publicly, he has not been a recluse with the men trying to put together a deal in St. Louis. Rams officials and local negotiators have had a constant dialogue all along, the sources say.

• The silence from local negotiators does not mean they haven’t been working feverishly to put a deal together. According to these sources, that silence could be broken with the completion of next month’s midterm elections. What local negotiators have been working on, and could be prepared to publicly discuss within the next month or so, is a proposal for an open-air stadium along the St. Louis riverfront between the new Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge and the Lumiere Place Casino and Hotels.

• While a retractable-roofed stadium isn’t out of the question, the open-air stadium proposal seems to be the one that local deal makers think makes the most sense both financially and politically....

This is the first time I have heard concrete conversations about what the city and state are trying to do. Up until now, it has been a lot of ambitious gossip and wishful long-range thinking. But now, finally, there seems to be legitimate work being done to secure a long-term NFL future for St. Louis.

What I’m being told is that there is a serious movement locally now to ensure that an impressive NFL stadium will be built in the shadows of the Dome and that city and state officials will not rest until there is a team taking up permanent resident in that new edifice.
Interesting that this is coming from Burwell: someone known for not being very positive or the bearer of good news.

Will be interesting to see if the Rams' buy the open-air idea after supposedly really liking Indianapolis' Lucas Oil Stadium and it's retractable setup.

PostOct 21, 2014#22682014-10-21T01:59+00:00

Missouri governor has mystery meeting with St. Louis mayor
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 51f5e.html

The subject of such a private meeting of elected leaders is of particular interest in the wake of the unrest in Ferguson — where government leaders have promised better communication — as well as other big issues like the uncertainty of the St. Louis Rams football franchise in the city.

PostOct 21, 2014#22692014-10-21T21:02+00:00

Another "the sky is falling".

NFL to survey L.A. market in possible step toward team relocation
http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp ... story.html

Beginning Tuesday, the league will begin a formal market assessment of the L.A. area, The Times has learned. The NFL will email questionnaires to about 2,000 potential customers to better gauge the demand for a team and what people want in terms of a stadium, seating and amenities.

The fact that the NFL is conducting a survey is not necessarily earthshaking news, nor is it an indication that a return to L.A. is imminent. However, it is an incremental step in the process, indicating that the league has intensified its attention on the nation's second-largest market.

Last week, Anschutz Entertainment Group secured a six-month extension of the Farmers Field agreement in hopes of attracting an NFL team or teams to play in a downtown stadium. The NFL is also evaluating two potential sites in Carson.

If an NFL team intends to relocate, it must inform the league during a two-month window that opens at the end of the regular season.

RedOctober · PostOct 22, 2014#22702014-10-22T12:54+00:00

Well the NFL had already announced and identified the 3 teams that could possibly move to L.A. 1. Raiders 2. Chargers 3. Rams. Why not all 3 teams play in L.A.

gary kreie · PostOct 22, 2014#22712014-10-22T15:25+00:00

RedOctober wrote:Well the NFL had already announced and identified the 3 teams that could possibly move to L.A. 1. Raiders 2. Chargers 3. Rams. Why not all 3 teams play in L.A.

On a triangular field.

dbInSouthCity · PostOct 22, 2014#22722014-10-22T15:36+00:00

On Dec 28th after the game, i would not be surprised if the Rams were 10-6
Chargers after losing to Arizona went on a 5 game win streak vs some really bad teams- that included the bills, raiders, jags and jets...so that's a winnable game.....beating the Broncos at home will be tough but i think once this D is playing up to full potential its a good chance

Sun, Oct 26 @ Chiefs W
Sun, Nov 2 @ 49ers L
Sun, Nov 9 @ Cardinals W
Sun, Nov 16 Broncos W
Sun, Nov 23 @ Chargers W
Sun, Nov 30 Raiders W
Sun, Dec 7 @ Redskins W
Thu, Dec 11 Cardinals W
Sun, Dec 21 Giants W
Sun, Dec 28 @ Seahawks L

of course we can easily go
L
L
L
L
L
W
W
W
W
L

ajwillikers · PostOct 22, 2014#22732014-10-22T17:38+00:00

CRAZY LIKE A FOX!

I'd still be okay with a "salvaged" 6-10 season. But would still take 8-8. 8-8 may be just "average" but still a marked improvement over the 2005-2011 seasons.

Also 8-8 looks like sword fighting snowmen.

dweebe · PostOct 24, 2014#22742014-10-24T14:29+00:00

We're back deep on the "they're pretty much already gone" side.

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/S ... Louis.aspx

dbInSouthCity · PostOct 24, 2014#22752014-10-24T14:35+00:00

dweebe wrote:We're back deep on the "they're pretty much already gone" side.

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/S ... Louis.aspx

^ yawn....there is literally nothing new in that report....and Kevin Demoff did say these reports will get worse before it gets better.

St. Louis Rams

Choose Display Mode