Great Article...

[WG]

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=5079560&BRD=386&PAG=461&dept_id=444921&rfi=6

It's also a Sunday news item.

Some facts about our 1st and 2nd string DLs thus far:

Haven't recorded a sack yet in 2 PS games.
Were unable to force the Vikes to punt in the first half.
Allowed the Vikes to convert 2 of 3 3rd-downs of 7+ yards.
Put virtually no pressure on the QBs.

As predicted, the opposing QB has all day to run around and wait for a WR to get open, thus negating what otherwise should be outstanding DB play. Our LBs are unable to play effectively against the pass as a result too.

I should have entitled this thread "See I told you so #1". I've been saying since last season ended that not getting a name DT would cost us. But what's the use. I do not understand how the FO/TD could have overlooked this. It simply boggles the mind!

As a result, talent at DB and LB will be largely negated as a result simply b/c we don't have NFL caliber starters on the DL. Oh well, at least the coaches/GM have no excuses.

This one's on them!

[WG]

It seems that our only hope is that our O scores 30+ points each and every week.

But if we don't end up signing a DL-man, a good one, which is becoming more and more unlikely, then if our O doesn't respond by being among the top 6 in the league, we could very well find ourselves in the Niners' shoes of being 6-10 w/ the 6th overall Scoring Offense and the 28th overall Scoring Defense.

They also didn't have the tough schedule that we had either. So that could drastically be less than 6-10.

Funny thing is that that year:

Garcia was 63.3% for 4,278 yards, 7.6 ypa, 31 TDs, 10 INTs, and 71 for 415 rushing and 4 TDs

Garner was 1,142 yards, 4.4 ypc, 7 TDs, 647 receiving and 3 TDs

Owens was 97 for 1,451, 15.9 ypc, 13 TDs

I am not expecting anyone of our players, except for possibly Moulds, to achieve those milestones. Henry may have that rushing, but not total yards.

I am disturbed and somewhat PO'd that this didn't dawn on TD during the offseason. I mean if many of the fans could have envisioned this, then why didn't he?!?!

Unless something changes drastically, the O may be fun to watch and dramatically improved, but it does not appear that it's gonna make a difference at this point. Signing Price and Ahanotou is not the answer that we are seeking.

Two weeks left...

[siva]

It seemed after the Cincinati game that things would be much better when more of the blitz packages of the 46 are used, both in pressuring the QB as well as in playing the run. But after the Minnesota game, and considering Newman's comment that they actually took a step backward, that doesn't seem to be the case.

[Typ0]

I don't think it was overlooked wys they just made choices. If you had your way Travis Brown would be our QB and I don't see how that would have helped the team even if we got a good DT.

[justasportsfan]

I do have a problem w/ that article. It implies that our D Sucks. For a D to suck the D has to exist. We don't have one therefore it can't suck. Therefore that article is false.

[Sabre Ally]

:rofl: Great answer justa.

[Bufftp]

I do not know what the solution is now, but I think the choice go for DB now or never, and if they got DB, do the DL line next year.

[Quizlet2002]

Wys--- has that hot sauce gone to your head? :) -- first of all- our Defense SUCKS- plain and simple. BUT- the rams had a good offense and a BAD defense, and went to the SB 2 out of 3 years... point proven

[The_Philster]

Originally posted by Quizlet2002
Wys--- has that hot sauce gone to your head? :) -- first of all- our Defense SUCKS- plain and simple. BUT- the rams had a good offense and a BAD defense, and went to the SB 2 out of 3 years... point proven

actually, the Rams had one of the top Defenses in the league last year

[HenryRules]

The Rams actually had a good defense the two years they went to the Super Bowl. The year they didn't, they had a horrible record and a horrible defense. Point proven.

[mybills]

<b>I should have entitled this thread "See I told you so #1". I've been saying since last season ended that not getting a name DT would cost us. But what's the use. I do not understand how the FO/TD could have overlooked this. It simply boggles the mind!</b>


They couldn't have overlooked it wys, c'mon now. I think it's all about choices. Boy, they had so many. So many things needed to fix this team. They weren't expecting to do it all this year, but have accomplished a lot just by fixing our OL. Next year they'll finish the job. We just need to be patient.

[WG]

This has nothing to do w/ signing DB. We could still have signed a couple of DTs.

Why is M. Price getting $2.5M/yr. Does anyone here think that a guy who's started one season due to an injury in 5 seasons played should get that kind of money when other much better and less expensive OL-men got quite a bit less from their signing teams? I don't. Price is getting twice what he's likely worth. He's not good. He's very average based on what I've seen.

I don't think this has much to do w/ Drew at all. We had some money but IMO just didn't spend it wisely.

An aside however, what do you think would have made us better off, Chandler/Brown and a very solid DL or what we have now?

I think the former although I'm quite content w/ the O as it now is playing. You gotta have good lines. If you don't, doesn't matter what else is there.

Good that Drew is here, but that didn't prevent us from signing Grady Jackson or about 4 or 5 others whom we could have afforded.

[WG]

We have money to pump a couple of MIL into signing Ahanatou and Price, right? Where did that come from all of a sudden?

[lordofgun]

I refuse to panic until the real games begin.

[Quizlet2002]

Originally posted by HenryRules
The Rams actually had a good defense the two years they went to the Super Bowl. The year they didn't, they had a horrible record and a horrible defense. Point proven.

Why dont you look at the stats bro. No offense but- They where around 19-20th worst in the league in 98-99-2000. Why do you think the score for both teams where very high?

[HenryRules]

I was only referring to the years they went to the Super Bowl. Since last year's statistics are the only ones I could quickly find, I'll use those. The Rams were:
7th in the NFL in pts against
3rd in the NFL in yards allowed per game
8th in the NFL in interceptions
7th in the NFL in sacks.

To me, that's a good defense. Don't know what you consider good.

[HenryRules]

Okay, I found the stats from '99 when the Rams won the Super Bowl. The Rams were:
4th in the NFL in points against
7th in the NFL in yards allowed per game
2nd in the NFL in interceptions
1st in the NFL in sacks.

What do they have to do to have a good defense in your books? I realize they didn't set records either year, but to me, both of those years, they had a damned good defense.

[HenryRules]

Oh yeah ... point proven.

[lordofgun]

Originally posted by HenryRules
Oh yeah ... point proven.

:lol:

[lordofgun]

Actually, the Rams D of 2000 was pretty bad. They gave up 471 points, and nearly 5,500 yards. 99 and 2001, they weren't bad.