Week 10 - Rams @ Steelers

[jrry32]

39 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

Trent Williams is 31years old. By comparison, Whitworth is 37. We could still get 4 years of above average production out of him at LT. Enough for me.

Andrew Whitworth is the exception, not the rule. Joe Thomas retired after his age-33 season. Orlando Pace retired after his age-34 season. Jonathan Ogden retired after his age-33 season. Walter Jones retired after his age-35 season. Michael Roos retired after his age-32 season. Jordan Gross retired after his age-33 season. David Diehl retired after his age-33 season. Ryan Clady retired after his age-30 season. Matt Light retired after his age-33 season.

Guys like Whit and Jason Peters, who play at a high level past their age-35 season, are extremely rare. Williams may not play past 33 years old, and if he does, there's no guarantee he plays at a high level.

[BStanRamFan]

20 minutes ago, JonStark said:

Trent Williams was not for trade until the day before the deadline. We asked, and they shot us down. There's no point in comparing something that was possible to something that was impossible. 

The topic came up on one of these posts who we would prefer if we had the chance. Jrry said he would prefer Jalen because of X,Y,Z. I said I'd prefer Trent because of D,E,F.

Both were topics of trade talks and had ties to the Rams. Not comparing possibility of the two, compared who would you prefer if you had the choice. Chill, guy. 

[BStanRamFan]

7 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Andrew Whitworth is the exception, not the rule. Joe Thomas retired after his age-33 season. Orlando Pace retired after his age-34 season. Jonathan Ogden retired after his age-33 season. Walter Jones retired after his age-35 season. Michael Roos retired after his age-32 season. Jordan Gross retired after his age-33 season. David Diehl retired after his age-33 season. Ryan Clady retired after his age-30 season. Matt Light retired after his age-33 season.

Guys like Whit and Jason Peters, who play at a high level past their age-35 season, are extremely rare. Williams may not play past 33 years old, and if he does, there's no guarantee he plays at a high level.

I don't think it's a coincedence that the players who retired in that 32-33 range were from the previous generation (Pace, Jones, Roos, Light) vs. players who have been lucky enough to play in todays game with less padded practices, better medicine and treatments. i.e. Players are playing longer and at a higher level. We will see more of this as time goes on and we are seeing it now with Brady, Julius Peppers, Whitworth, Cameron Wake, Thomas Davis,Frank Gore, Fitz, Suggs, Staley, Jonathan Joseph. The guys I just named are 35+. 

[jrry32]

3 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

I don't think it's a coincedence that the players who retired in that 32-33 range were from the previous generation (Pace, Jones, Roos, Light) vs. players who have been lucky enough to play in todays game with less padded practices, better medicine and treatments. i.e. Players are playing longer and at a higher level. We will see more of this as time goes on and we are seeing it now with Brady, Julius Peppers, Whitworth, Cameron Wake, Thomas Davis,Frank Gore, Fitz, Suggs, Staley, Jonathan Joseph. The guys I just named are 35+. 

Okay. Let's take a look at the classes around Trent's (2010):

Eugene Monroe (09) - Retired

Michael Oher (09) - Retired

Andre Smith (09) - Major decline

Sebastian Vollmer (09) - Retired

Phil Loadholt (09) - Retired

Will Beatty (09) - Retired

Jake Long (08) - Retired

Ryan Clady (08) - Retired

Branden Albert (08) - Retired

Jeff Otah (08) - Retired

Sam Baker (08) - Retired

Diane Brown (08) - Still playing

Demetress Bell (08) - Retired

King Dunlap (08) - Retired

Joe Thomas (07) - Retired

Joe Staley (07) - Still playing

Doug Free (07) - Retired

Jermon Bushrod (07) - Retired

Jared Gaither (07) - Retired

All of these guys were average or better starting OTs at some point in their careers. Look at how few are still playing. You're making a low percentage bet imo.

[JonStark]

19 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

The topic came up on one of these posts who we would prefer if we had the chance. Jrry said he would prefer Jalen because of X,Y,Z. I said I'd prefer Trent because of D,E,F.

Both were topics of trade talks and had ties to the Rams. Not comparing possibility of the two, compared who would you prefer if you had the choice. Chill, guy. 

Well it's annoying that everyone and their mother (not specifically you) are just now realizing we need OL help and trying to condemn the Ramsey trade because of it. There was nothing available at the deadline that would help us as much as Ramsey does, and I don't even see how that's a debate. 

Now if you want to go back and say they screwed up letting Saffold or Sully walk, that's fair., but Williams was never an option regardless of what everyone thinks. 

[bertuzzi]

So is it pretty obvious that this is whitworths last season in the league or his last season on the rams? 

[BStanRamFan]

1 minute ago, JonStark said:

Well it's annoying that everyone and their mother (not specifically you) are just now realizing we need OL help and trying to condemn the Ramsey trade because of it. There was nothing available at the deadline that would help us as much as Ramsey does, and I don't even see how that's a debate. 

Now if you want to go back and say they screwed up letting Saffold or Sully walk, that's fair., but Williams was never an option regardless of what everyone thinks. 

Oh I know it's not me lol I voiced my concerns in August that gambling on youth and expecting to go 3 season in a row without injuries is far too risky. I got criticized because I questioned Kromer, McVay, and Snead about it, but turns out it was valid.

I admitted in my original post that the Ramsey trade vastly improved our defense, it just doesn't matter when you can't put points on the board. This is the second time our O was completely shut down (49ers) and the defense played well and we still lost. 

We didn't screw up letting Sully or Saffold walk. Saffold has graded out terribly this year, but not looking into veteran FA stop-gap type guys has hurt us and will be on full display this sunday vs. Chicago. 

[BStanRamFan]

16 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Okay. Let's take a look at the classes around Trent's (2010):

Eugene Monroe (09) - Retired

Michael Oher (09) - Retired

Andre Smith (09) - Major decline

Sebastian Vollmer (09) - Retired

Phil Loadholt (09) - Retired

Will Beatty (09) - Retired

Jake Long (08) - Retired

Ryan Clady (08) - Retired

Branden Albert (08) - Retired

Jeff Otah (08) - Retired

Sam Baker (08) - Retired

Diane Brown (08) - Still playing

Demetress Bell (08) - Retired

King Dunlap (08) - Retired

Joe Thomas (07) - Retired

Joe Staley (07) - Still playing

Doug Free (07) - Retired

Jermon Bushrod (07) - Retired

Jared Gaither (07) - Retired

All of these guys were average or better starting OTs at some point in their careers. Look at how few are still playing. You're making a low percentage bet imo.

Fair enough. I would of taken the gamble to keep focus on our window for a SuperBowl. The Rams are HEAVILY invested in the next 3 years given the contract structure of Goff, Gurley, Cooks; this just ties into that. Ramsey is great, HOF Caliber CB heading into his prime and changed the landscape of our defense....it just doesn't necessarily equate to wins as we saw and the Offense needs all the help it can get. Given that's where our focus has been, Williams would of added to that and we could sure as hell use it. Pointless now though. 

Edited November 12, 2019 by BStanRamFan

[JonStark]

5 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

Oh I know it's not me lol I voiced my concerns in August that gambling on youth and expecting to go 3 season in a row without injuries is far too risky. I got criticized because I questioned Kromer, McVay, and Snead about it, but turns out it was valid.

I admitted in my original post that the Ramsey trade vastly improved our defense, it just doesn't matter when you can't put points on the board. This is the second time our O was completely shut down (49ers) and the defense played well and we still lost. 

We didn't screw up letting Sully or Saffold walk. Saffold has graded out terribly this year, but not looking into veteran FA stop-gap type guys has hurt us and will be on full display this sunday vs. Chicago. 

Eh, I think there's a difference between Saffold returning to a familiar system and Saffold learning a new system on a team like the Titans without their starting LT for the first few games. I've gone on record saying letting Saffold go was a huge mistake. 

[bertuzzi]

4 minutes ago, JonStark said:

Eh, I think there's a difference between Saffold returning to a familiar system and Saffold learning a new system on a team like the Titans without their starting LT for the first few games. I've gone on record saying letting Saffold go was a huge mistake. 

I agree, ive watched a lot of gurley clips from the last 2 seasons and man staffold was in a lot of pulling plays that helped out gurley in massive runs. Can see staffold running down the field doing excellent downfield blocking. He might not be the best but he did do a lot of good things for the team.

[stl4life07]

2 hours ago, BStanRamFan said:

Bears- L

Ravens-L

Cardinals- W

Seahawks- W

Cowboys-L

49ers- L

7-9

Bears - W

Ravens - W (but it wouldnt shock me if its an L) Im only saying its a W because the Rams will show teams that they still are the reigning defending NFC champs so dont forget about it.

Cards - W

Seahawks - W

Cowboys - L tough just because I dont want them to win and have to hear Skip gloat about how the Cowboys got revenge and Goff isnt better than Dak and blah blah blah. I think if the Rams lose to the Ravens they will beat the Cowboys. I dont believe they win both. Then again this is the Cowboys we are talking about. They are an accident waiting to happen and it wouldnt shock me if Rams win and Gurley go off on them again because he loves to play the Cowboys lol. 

Niners - W because the Niners will be coming off a brutal came in New Orleans and they will be feeling the effects of playing in that Superdome. Plus the Rams will have revenge on their mind.

Cards - W it wouldnt shock me if the Cards won this one and actually split but a Rams team who is desperate need to win Week 17 to get in will show it and that will help them win this game and sweep the Cards

So Im saying (11-5). Depending on how it all falls with the Vikings (10-6) could do it but to make sure (11-5) I believe would do it. Again if you trust McVay and this coaching staff. If you trust the talent on this team and the heart and soul this team have in terms of fighting and being the two time division champs and reigning NFC champs then they wont go down like that. I get it they battling injuries but they battled with injuries last season. They had Talib out, Kupp out, Gurley missed the end of the regular season, Cooks was battling a concussion, Brown was out, Peters played on what looked to be a season-ending injury at the time. The Rams were winning high scoring games because the defense wasnt playing great last season. This year they are winning lower scoring games because the offense isnt playing great. The difference is last season the Rams were getting fortunate on calls and balls bouncing their way to win all those close games. This season its different but this team isnt going to go down without a fight so I dont see (7-9). Worst case scenario for me is (9-7). 

Edited November 12, 2019 by stl4life07

[rocky_rams]

5 hours ago, stl4life07 said:

Bears - W

Ravens - W (but it wouldnt shock me if its an L) Im only saying its a W because the Rams will show teams that they still are the reigning defending NFC champs so dont forget about it.

Cards - W

Seahawks - W

Cowboys - L tough just because I dont want them to win and have to hear Skip gloat about how the Cowboys got revenge and Goff isnt better than Dak and blah blah blah. I think if the Rams lose to the Ravens they will beat the Cowboys. I dont believe they win both. Then again this is the Cowboys we are talking about. They are an accident waiting to happen and it wouldnt shock me if Rams win and Gurley go off on them again because he loves to play the Cowboys lol. 

Niners - W because the Niners will be coming off a brutal came in New Orleans and they will be feeling the effects of playing in that Superdome. Plus the Rams will have revenge on their mind.

Cards - W it wouldnt shock me if the Cards won this one and actually split but a Rams team who is desperate need to win Week 17 to get in will show it and that will help them win this game and sweep the Cards

So Im saying (11-5). Depending on how it all falls with the Vikings (10-6) could do it but to make sure (11-5) I believe would do it. Again if you trust McVay and this coaching staff. If you trust the talent on this team and the heart and soul this team have in terms of fighting and being the two time division champs and reigning NFC champs then they wont go down like that. I get it they battling injuries but they battled with injuries last season. They had Talib out, Kupp out, Gurley missed the end of the regular season, Cooks was battling a concussion, Brown was out, Peters played on what looked to be a season-ending injury at the time. The Rams were winning high scoring games because the defense wasnt playing great last season. This year they are winning lower scoring games because the offense isnt playing great. The difference is last season the Rams were getting fortunate on calls and balls bouncing their way to win all those close games. This season its different but this team isnt going to go down without a fight so I dont see (7-9). Worst case scenario for me is (9-7). 

LMAO I hope you’re right.

It’s crazy how we have the most positive poster @stl4life07 and the most negative poster @Flounch on all of FF both as rams fans. 

At least we can balance out either extreme lol 

I’m glad we have you both to cancel the other out. Otherwise it would be insanity 

Edited November 12, 2019 by rocky_rams

[Flounch]

6 hours ago, stl4life07 said:

Bears - W

Ravens - W (but it wouldnt shock me if its an L) Im only saying its a W because the Rams will show teams that they still are the reigning defending NFC champs so dont forget about it.

Cards - W

Seahawks - W

Cowboys - L tough just because I dont want them to win and have to hear Skip gloat about how the Cowboys got revenge and Goff isnt better than Dak and blah blah blah. I think if the Rams lose to the Ravens they will beat the Cowboys. I dont believe they win both. Then again this is the Cowboys we are talking about. They are an accident waiting to happen and it wouldnt shock me if Rams win and Gurley go off on them again because he loves to play the Cowboys lol. 

Niners - W because the Niners will be coming off a brutal came in New Orleans and they will be feeling the effects of playing in that Superdome. Plus the Rams will have revenge on their mind.

Cards - W it wouldnt shock me if the Cards won this one and actually split but a Rams team who is desperate need to win Week 17 to get in will show it and that will help them win this game and sweep the Cards

So Im saying (11-5). Depending on how it all falls with the Vikings (10-6) could do it but to make sure (11-5) I believe would do it. Again if you trust McVay and this coaching staff. If you trust the talent on this team and the heart and soul this team have in terms of fighting and being the two time division champs and reigning NFC champs then they wont go down like that. I get it they battling injuries but they battled with injuries last season. They had Talib out, Kupp out, Gurley missed the end of the regular season, Cooks was battling a concussion, Brown was out, Peters played on what looked to be a season-ending injury at the time. The Rams were winning high scoring games because the defense wasnt playing great last season. This year they are winning lower scoring games because the offense isnt playing great. The difference is last season the Rams were getting fortunate on calls and balls bouncing their way to win all those close games. This season its different but this team isnt going to go down without a fight so I dont see (7-9). Worst case scenario for me is (9-7). 

What ?? Damn Fool 

It's a W for me. We are going 12-4 all the way, ALL THEE WAYYYY

[jrry32]

6 hours ago, BStanRamFan said:

Fair enough. I would of taken the gamble to keep focus on our window for a SuperBowl. The Rams are HEAVILY invested in the next 3 years given the contract structure of Goff, Gurley, Cooks; this just ties into that. Ramsey is great, HOF Caliber CB heading into his prime and changed the landscape of our defense....it just doesn't necessarily equate to wins as we saw and the Offense needs all the help it can get. Given that's where our focus has been, Williams would of added to that and we could sure as hell use it. Pointless now though. 

In hindsight, I still wouldn't have. I think Ramsey is worth it. However, in hindsight, I would have traded for another OL. I think the guys who would have made the most sense are Big V from the Eagles or Ty Nsekhe on the Bills.

[rocky_rams]

48 minutes ago, Flounch said:

What ?? Damn Fool 

It's a W for me. We are going 12-4 all the way, ALL THEE WAYYYY

I like this side of you flounch. 

I almost wish we can lose more often so we can get this positive side of you.