Week One GDT: Los Angeles Rams at Oakland Raiders

[stl4life07]

Can we at least agree to one thing? McVay is the Goff what Shanny was to Ryan. Without Shanny, Ryan is a career 4100yd passer that is a 2:1 td to int ratio. With Shanny Ryan had the best season of his career, won MVP, and shouldve won the Superbowl. The only reason why I say this is because McVay and Shanny both are familiar with each other, they both are young bright offensive genius. Not only that but when Goff came out, his pro comp was Ryan. So with McVay as the head coach, Goff is going to play at a level that is going to be sustainable. Last year wasnt a fluke. Goff is a top 10 QB with McVay and last year showed it. This year will validate it.

With that being said, I dont think the Rams are overrated. The only reason why the moves they made was "splashy" is because the guys they brought in was of high caliber. The guys they brought fit what McVay wants to do on offense and what Wade wants to do on defense. Just from a football purest, these guys are great fits and if people stop looking at the names and start looking at how these guys fit within the scheme you all will see these moves as being great instead of being "splashy" moves just to make headlines. Ill go back to last offseason, was signing Woods a "splashy" move? Was signing Robey-Coleman or Sullivan a "splashy" move? No. Signing Whitworth was a "splashy" move. Nobody said anything but positives about how great of a signing Whitworth was. But when it comes to getting Suh, Peters, and Talib its "splashy" and the Rams made these moves to get headlines and they arent going to be as good as last season. Like I just shake my head at some people.

Anyways, as for the game, sorry Raiders fans I think the Rams will win this game by at least 2 tds. There is a reason why McVay didnt play his starting offense. He played his starting defense Week 3 for a series. The reason why he didnt play his starting offense is because he has something in store for the Raiders and the NFL in general. The Rams offense is going to be even better this season. I think they will be unstoppable because Goff has had a great camp. Gurley has even gotten better. The rapport that Goff has with Kupp, Woods, and even Cooks is looking great throughout camp. McVay didnt need to see anything more than what he was seeing in camp when his offense was going up against Wade defense every day and then when they had joint practice against a great Baltimore defense the Rams offense still looked sharp. So I think the Rams are going to look in mid-season form Week 1. I like the Raiders young defense so hopefully they can grow throughout the season. As for Week 1, its not going to be pretty. 

Good luck Week 1 in terms of nobody getting hurt and the rest of the season. I hope my guy Key lives up to what I think he can because as an LSU fan I was so high on him and if he stays focus he can turn out to be one of the steals in the draft and be an elite level pass rusher. 

[BayRaider]

5 minutes ago, stl4life07 said:

Can we at least agree to one thing? McVay is the Goff what Shanny was to Ryan. Without Shanny, Ryan is a career 4100yd passer that is a 2:1 td to int ratio. With Shanny Ryan had the best season of his career, won MVP, and shouldve won the Superbowl. The only reason why I say this is because McVay and Shanny both are familiar with each other, they both are young bright offensive genius. Not only that but when Goff came out, his pro comp was Ryan. So with McVay as the head coach, Goff is going to play at a level that is going to be sustainable. Last year wasnt a fluke. Goff is a top 10 QB with McVay and last year showed it. This year will validate it.

With that being said, I dont think the Rams are overrated. The only reason why the moves they made was "splashy" is because the guys they brought in was of high caliber. The guys they brought fit what McVay wants to do on offense and what Wade wants to do on defense. Just from a football purest, these guys are great fits and if people stop looking at the names and start looking at how these guys fit within the scheme you all will see these moves as being great instead of being "splashy" moves just to make headlines. Ill go back to last offseason, was signing Woods a "splashy" move? Was signing Robey-Coleman or Sullivan a "splashy" move? No. Signing Whitworth was a "splashy" move. Nobody said anything but positives about how great of a signing Whitworth was. But when it comes to getting Suh, Peters, and Talib its "splashy" and the Rams made these moves to get headlines and they arent going to be as good as last season. Like I just shake my head at some people.

Anyways, as for the game, sorry Raiders fans I think the Rams will win this game by at least 2 tds. There is a reason why McVay didnt play his starting offense. He played his starting defense Week 3 for a series. The reason why he didnt play his starting offense is because he has something in store for the Raiders and the NFL in general. The Rams offense is going to be even better this season. I think they will be unstoppable because Goff has had a great camp. Gurley has even gotten better. The rapport that Goff has with Kupp, Woods, and even Cooks is looking great throughout camp. McVay didnt need to see anything more than what he was seeing in camp when his offense was going up against Wade defense every day and then when they had joint practice against a great Baltimore defense the Rams offense still looked sharp. So I think the Rams are going to look in mid-season form Week 1. I like the Raiders young defense so hopefully they can grow throughout the season. As for Week 1, its not going to be pretty. 

Good luck Week 1 in terms of nobody getting hurt and the rest of the season. I hope my guy Key lives up to what I think he can because as an LSU fan I was so high on him and if he stays focus he can turn out to be one of the steals in the draft and be an elite level pass rusher. 

Rams could easily be the Raiders by two TDs but there is so much homerism in this post. I've also seen your posts in the Rams forum. If you don't have the Rams going 13-3 and winning the SB I'd be shocked. 

News Flash by the way, Gruden didn't play any of his offensive starters against the Rams either. The world has no idea what he might unleash Week 1. 

[stl4life07]

8 minutes ago, BayRaider said:

Rams could easily be the Raiders by two TDs but there is so much homerism in this post. I've also seen your posts in the Rams forum. If you don't have the Rams going 13-3 and winning the SB I'd be shocked. 

News Flash by the way, Gruden didn't play any of his offensive starters against the Rams either. The world has no idea what he might unleash Week 1. 

Yeah there is homerism but no I do think McVay didnt play his starters at all this preseason because loved what he saw in camp/practice that he didnt feel the need to play his guys in games. Plus reports were that McVay had added alot more plays to the offense and so he isnt going to want to show anything which most teams are the same with in the preseason.

I dont have the Rams going 13-3. I have them going 12-4 and winning the Superbowl. I made that prediction this morning. I have been holding it off until today. Up until today all I had the Rams doing was grabbing either the 1 or 2 seed getting a BYE, winning the divisional round and making it to the NFCCG. Today I was like what the heck an "All LA Superbowl" Rams vs Chargers. The last time the Rams won the Superbowl it was in Atlanta, poetic justice, they will win the Superbowl again in Atlanta lol.

[big_palooka]

1 hour ago, jrry32 said:

The book is out on which guy? The HC who is running the system he ran as Washington's OC, which is a variant of the Gruden and Shanahan WCOs, or the traditional pocket passing QB who played lights out in a WCO? The book was already out on both guys. 

Saying team will see the Rams coming now. It's about consistency. They burst onto the scene under McVey, now he has to prove it's sustainable. 

1 hour ago, jrry32 said:

Can you name a better measure of determining difficulty of schedule than the overall records of the Rams' opponents? I doubt it.

You have to look at the cicumstances within each game. Week 3, played 9ers with Hoyer starting. Played the Cards without Palmer. Cowboys, while Lee was out. Colts without Brissett starting. Texans with Savage starting. So the collective teams W/L is meaningless for me. It's all about the circumstances they played in.

 

1 hour ago, jrry32 said:

I also have to laugh at the Cards being a mess.

They were a mess when the Rams played them is what I'm saying. Carson Palmer played sparingly. Maybe 2 quarters of those games? They were a mess without the QB.

1 hour ago, jrry32 said:

Fact is that the Rams played 8 games against teams with a winning record and 10 games against teams with a .500 or better record. They went 5-3 and 7-3, respectively.

And in most those games, they had favorable circumstances. Playing against backup QBs, etc. 

Rams are a sound team. I love McVey and what they've built, but they are overrated in the fact they are a Superbowl darling for a lot of people and they won't make it that far. 

[big_palooka]

55 minutes ago, stl4life07 said:

Anyways, as for the game, sorry Raiders fans I think the Rams will win this game by at least 2 tds. There is a reason why McVay didnt play his starting offense. He played his starting defense Week 3 for a series. The reason why he didnt play his starting offense is because he has something in store for the Raiders and the NFL in general. The Rams offense is going to be even better this season. I think they will be unstoppable because Goff has had a great camp. Gurley has even gotten better. The rapport that Goff has with Kupp, Woods, and even Cooks is looking great throughout camp. McVay didnt need to see anything more than what he was seeing in camp when his offense was going up against Wade defense every day and then when they had joint practice against a great Baltimore defense the Rams offense still looked sharp. So I think the Rams are going to look in mid-season form Week 1. I like the Raiders young defense so hopefully they can grow throughout the season. As for Week 1, its not going to be pretty

This just reeeeeeks of homerism. Literally find a fan of any NFL team and they will give you their "how great everything has looked in camp" hype post. 

I mean.... look at the Raiders, you can play this homerism too. Hardly played their starters. Gruden is saying the QB knows the offense better than him. He's keeping it under wraps for the season. His playbook is the largest Greg Olsen has ever been a part of in 30+ years of coaching.

Lynch is in great shape. Martin is explosive and rejuvenated. Nelson looks faster and has been in great rapport with Carr. Conley looks shut down. Marquel Lee has grown leaps and bound and will be a defensive leader. Osemele lost 20 pounds and is looking like an all pro. The list goes on.

Means nothing until the lights go on.

 

[jrry32]

11 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

Saying team will see the Rams coming now. It's about consistency. They burst onto the scene under McVey, now he has to prove it's sustainable. 

You have to look at the cicumstances within each game. Week 3, played 9ers with Hoyer starting. Played the Cards without Palmer. Cowboys, while Lee was out. Colts without Brissett starting. Texans with Savage starting. So the collective teams W/L is meaningless for me. It's all about the circumstances they played in.

 

They were a mess when the Rams played them is what I'm saying. Carson Palmer played sparingly. Maybe 2 quarters of those games? They were a mess without the QB.

And in most those games, they had favorable circumstances. Playing against backup QBs, etc. 

Rams are a sound team. I love McVey and what they've built, but they are overrated in the fact they are a Superbowl darling for a lot of people and they won't make it that far. 

1. The Cardinals went 5-4 in the 9 games Palmer missed. Your argument is without merit.

2. The Rams having favorable circumstances is laughable. Every team suffers injuries. Saying the Rams played teams that had some player missing is insignificant. 

3. You really want to talk about the Colts with Brissett? What difference would he have made? The Rams destroyed the Colts. Brissett isn't Tom Brady.

4. The majority of teams played the 49ers with Hoyer or Beathard starting. The Rams are one of the few to play Garoppolo. That point is without merit.

5. Name a single game from last year where the opposition having their starting QB would have changed a Rams win to a loss. Houston is the only arguable game. And even then, that seems unlikely.

You're not the first person to make these tired arguments. It follows the same pattern. Person claims the Rams had an easy schedule. I point out that the data says the exact opposite. That person tries to invoke injuries as an excuse for why we should ignore the data that contradicts their claims.

[big_palooka]

1 minute ago, jrry32 said:

1. The Cardinals went 5-4 in the 9 games Palmer missed. Your argument is without merit.

2. The Rams having favorable circumstances is laughable. Every team suffers injuries. Saying the Rams played teams that had some player missing is insignificant. 

3. You really want to talk about the Colts with Brissett? What difference would he have made? The Rams destroyed the Colts. Brissett isn't Tom Brady.

4. The majority of teams played the 49ers with Hoyer or Beathard starting. The Rams are one of the few to play Garoppolo. That point is without merit.

5. Name a single game from last year where the opposition having their starting QB would have changed a Rams win to a loss. Houston is the only arguable game. And even then, that seems unlikely.

Agree to disagree. I don't think they beat any good teams outside the Saints, Jags and Titans. 

They are overrated in my eyes because I don't think they are a Superbowl caliber team as they are being billed to be.

[stl4life07]

6 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

This just reeeeeeks of homerism. Literally find a fan of any NFL team and they will give you their "how great everything has looked in camp" hype post. 

I mean.... look at the Raiders, you can play this homerism too. Hardly played their starters. Gruden is saying the QB knows the offense better than him. He's keeping it under wraps for the season. His playbook is the largest Greg Olsen has ever been a part of in 30+ years of coaching.

Lynch is in great shape. Martin is explosive and rejuvenated. Nelson looks faster and has been in great rapport with Carr. Conley looks shut down. Marquel Lee has grown leaps and bound and will be a defensive leader. Osemele lost 20 pounds and is looking like an all pro. The list goes on.

Means nothing until the lights go on.

 

 

Here is one problem, the Rams are coming off a season in which they were great on offense. To progress in Year 2 of McVay system to become even better is not hype. I get what you are saying though because every team could say that but again with some substance of Year 1 to Year 2 progression within an offense is normal. Just look at Cousins in Year 1 to Year 2 in McVay offense. Look at Ryan who had a career year and won the MVP in Year 2 in Shanny offense. So I do have substance and not just empty hype. Even Wentz in Year 1 to Year 2 in Pederson offense. Like there is substance. I havent even mentioned how when Goff and the offense has to go up against Suh, Peters, Talib in practice where its competitive it helps the everyone. Like Goff has to constantly throw into tight windows when he is throwing at Cooks and Kupp and Woods with Talib and Peters and Robey-Coleman blanketing them. He is doing it with success. Then on the flip side the defense is having some success too with everything McVay and the offense is throwing at them. Its not like in Dallas where you hear the receivers are having a great camp then you think about how bad their secondary is so its not like they are practicing against elite talent every day. Thats what I am saying. Just progression from Year 1 to Year 2 and the "iron sharpening iron" theory because some of the best competition the Rams are going to be facing is going against each other in practice everyday and thats how they get better and be ready for game day when they are facing more competition.

[jrry32]

13 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

Agree to disagree. I don't think they beat any good teams outside the Saints, Jags and Titans. 

They are overrated in my eyes because I don't think they are a Superbowl caliber team as they are being billed to be.

So we went 3-3 against "good teams?" How many good teams did the Saints beat? Are they overrated? How about the Steelers? The Rams are as much a Super Bowl contender as any other team. How many teams have an offense, defense, and special teams that could each end up top 5 in the NFL?

[Bitty 2.0]

1 hour ago, stl4life07 said:

Yeah there is homerism but no I do think McVay didnt play his starters at all this preseason because loved what he saw in camp/practice that he didnt feel the need to play his guys in games. Plus reports were that McVay had added alot more plays to the offense and so he isnt going to want to show anything which most teams are the same with in the preseason.

I dont have the Rams going 13-3. I have them going 12-4 and winning the Superbowl. I made that prediction this morning. I have been holding it off until today. Up until today all I had the Rams doing was grabbing either the 1 or 2 seed getting a BYE, winning the divisional round and making it to the NFCCG. Today I was like what the heck an "All LA Superbowl" Rams vs Chargers. The last time the Rams won the Superbowl it was in Atlanta, poetic justice, they will win the Superbowl again in Atlanta lol.

 I don’t know Minnesota is gonna be hard to beat.

[stl4life07]

11 minutes ago, Bitty 2.0 said:

 I don’t know Minnesota is gonna be hard to beat.

Yeah the NFC is brutal. I think the two things that the Rams have going for them is they are in the easier division of all the NFC divisions and Minnesota travels to LA, Green Bay travels to LA, Philly travels too LA. It seems like most of the Rams tougher games will be in LA. 

If we are focusing strictly on Minnesota though, the concern I have with them is oline for one. Cousins isnt Keenum. Cousins tend to fold under pressure when he is being pressured in the pocket where as we saw Keenum last year did a great job when he was being pressured. Not to mention just in general Cousins isnt very good when the spotlight shines the brightest. I have to see Cousins finally start winning though types of games when the spotlight is big. I will also be looking at how the Vikings team will do with Cousins. Last year they rallied around Keenum. Keenum took this team to 13-3 and one win away from the Superbowl. Ray Lewis and Shannon Sharpe talked about it one day how when the Ravens won the Superbowl in 2000 with Dilfer. He wasnt the most talented QB but the team rallied around him. When the Ravens moved on from him and got the more talented QB in Grbac the team struggled because the chemistry was lost and the guy they rallied behind wasnt there. I want to see if Cousins can get the same chemistry with the team as Keenum did. I want to see if the team is going to rally behind Cousins like they did with Keenum. Plus when was the last time a team won the Superbowl with a 1st year QB and a 1st year OC? I dont know. So thats why I am curious about the Vikings but no doubt they are talented and they are going to be a threat in the NFC. 

[Darbsk]

2 hours ago, stl4life07 said:

Yeah there is homerism but no I do think McVay didnt play his starters at all this preseason because loved what he saw in camp/practice that he didnt feel the need to play his guys in games. Plus reports were that McVay had added alot more plays to the offense and so he isnt going to want to show anything which most teams are the same with in the preseason.

I dont have the Rams going 13-3. I have them going 12-4 and winning the Superbowl. I made that prediction this morning. I have been holding it off until today. Up until today all I had the Rams doing was grabbing either the 1 or 2 seed getting a BYE, winning the divisional round and making it to the NFCCG. Today I was like what the heck an "All LA Superbowl" Rams vs Chargers. The last time the Rams won the Superbowl it was in Atlanta, poetic justice, they will win the Superbowl again in Atlanta lol.

Frankly, there's more chance of the Raiders going to the Superbowl than the perennial underachiever Chargers 

I do like the Rams though, think Goff has shown flashes of being a great QB and like most people love the D. Donald was my favourite player in that draft (Mack included)!

[SimonGruber]

I really don’t like this matchup at all. Raiders need a turnover or 2. Takin the Rams in the supercontest forgive me. 

[Silver&Black88]

 

Knew this was going to happen this week smh

[stl4life07]

1 hour ago, Darbsk said:

Frankly, there's more chance of the Raiders going to the Superbowl than the perennial underachiever Chargers 

I do like the Rams though, think Goff has shown flashes of being a great QB and like most people love the D. Donald was my favourite player in that draft (Mack included)!

Trust me I didnt want to do it with the Chargers because they for some reason just have bad luck with injuries and close games. Its brutal to pick a team to come out of the NFC but I dont want to pick the Patriots in the AFC and everyone else has warts. The Chargers from the eye test has the fewest warts. They just need to not get mashed with injuries (already lost Henry and Verrett) and please please win some close games and they should be fine.