The Rams aren't the only 0-3 team in the NFC, but they haven't looked good at all in their losses. While they still are able to score at times, they have shown no run game; they are making serious errors in terms of penalties and special teams; the offensive line is pathetic and Warner is getting slammed; Warner himself has thrown far too many interceptions, even accounting for the top-flight defenses of Tampa Bay and New York Giants; and the defense is sliding back towards its 2000 performance. It could not hold Tampa Bay at all last week.
The loss of some key personnel (Little, Az-Hakim, etc.) has had an effect, but I think the main problems are two-fold. First, opposing defenses know that if they press Warner, the offensive line can't open holes for Faulk any more and rattling Warner is a way to throw off his rhythm. Also, the Rams receivers often seem scared and the team in general doesn't appear to have any drive to win. It's as if they easily concede points and then almost lackadaisically say, oh, maybe we'll come back. They've come close in each of the three losses, but they are lacking the determination to press to the win. This was evident in the Super Bowl, and it's glaring now. I think the arrogance of their offensive-minded coach also is hurting them. These losses do appear to be having a chastening effect with him at least.
This week's game is crucial. If the Rams lose to Dallas, well, I think they can hang it up. They could still finish at .500, but this is a game they can and must win. Even with their decimated offensive line (Pace is out, Nütten is hurt, etc.) they can still win. They're in a very weak division, but that's little consolation. They've got to stop sleepwalking. Or perhaps they can't.
Full Version: 0-3 Rams: Are They Really This Bad?
The mystique has been shattered. The Rams ought to win Sunday, but they're not a serious contender any more. They're a beatable team and teams have learned how to beat them.
Dallas is going to beat them this weekend. Dallas' D-line is going to eat up the Lams' O-Line.
This is the year that "Same old sorry assed Rams" will come back into fashion.
This is the year that "Same old sorry assed Rams" will come back into fashion.
[quote]Originally posted by PCC:
Dallas is going to beat them this weekend. Dallas' D-line is going to eat up the Lams' O-Line.
Wow, what are you on? Can I get some? The Doomsday Defense may be back in Big-D, but the only offense in the stadium is going to be the offensive stench coming from Q Carter and the wrong way gang on the other side of the ball.
Dallas is going to beat them this weekend. Dallas' D-line is going to eat up the Lams' O-Line.
Wow, what are you on? Can I get some? The Doomsday Defense may be back in Big-D, but the only offense in the stadium is going to be the offensive stench coming from Q Carter and the wrong way gang on the other side of the ball.
jqueer:
In addition to right tackle John St.Clair who plays like he's not there, their left tackle tackle, Orlando Pace will miss this game. That does not bode well for the Lams.
In addition to right tackle John St.Clair who plays like he's not there, their left tackle tackle, Orlando Pace will miss this game. That does not bode well for the Lams.
Are we seriously going to have an argument about which team is worse? I'm going back to the P&R threads
[quote]Originally posted by jqueer:
The Doomsday Defense may be back in Big-D,
Oh? So they just took a week off this past Sunday, then?
The Doomsday Defense may be back in Big-D,
Oh? So they just took a week off this past Sunday, then?
Defense will ALWAYS learn how to play against an offense--be it the West Coast, run & gun, etc.-- and once teams learned how to defend against the Rams big guns (Warner & especially Faulk) the jig was up.
~Adam
~Adam
To answer the question: the Rams aren't this bad. They even still have a legit shot at the play-offs because the 49ers are having problems too and the other two teams in the division (the Cardinals and the Seahawks) are a lock at staying pathetic all season long. The Rams could get it together and go 9-7, which could win this division.
But what's the point? The Eagles are a lock to win the NFC and go the Super Bowl. Everyone else in the NFC -- Saints included -- are playing for draft positioning.
But what's the point? The Eagles are a lock to win the NFC and go the Super Bowl. Everyone else in the NFC -- Saints included -- are playing for draft positioning.
Well we will see how they do against Dallas. If the Cowboys beat them, then we know for sure they are horrible and need to start rebuilding immediately. I think a win against the hapless Cowboys could get them on track.
Josh
[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:
The Rams aren't the only 0-3 team in the NFC, but they haven't looked good at all in their losses. While they still are able to score at times, they have shown no run game; they are making serious errors in terms of penalties and special teams; the offensive line is pathetic and Warner is getting slammed; Warner himself has thrown far too many interceptions, even accounting for the top-flight defenses of Tampa Bay and New York Giants; and the defense is sliding back towards its 2000 performance. It could not hold Tampa Bay at all last week.
The loss of some key personnel (Little, Az-Hakim, etc.) has had an effect, but I think the main problems are two-fold. First, opposing defenses know that if they press Warner, the offensive line can't open holes for Faulk any more and rattling Warner is a way to throw off his rhythm. Also, the Rams receivers often seem scared and the team in general doesn't appear to have any drive to win. It's as if they easily concede points and then almost lackadaisically say, oh, maybe we'll come back. They've come close in each of the three losses, but they are lacking the determination to press to the win. This was evident in the Super Bowl, and it's glaring now. I think the arrogance of their offensive-minded coach also is hurting them. These losses do appear to be having a chastening effect with him at least.
This week's game is crucial. If the Rams lose to Dallas, well, I think they can hang it up. They could still finish at .500, but this is a game they can and must win. Even with their decimated offensive line (Pace is out, Nütten is hurt, etc.) they can still win. They're in a very weak division, but that's little consolation. They've got to stop sleepwalking. Or perhaps they can't.
Josh
[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:
The Rams aren't the only 0-3 team in the NFC, but they haven't looked good at all in their losses. While they still are able to score at times, they have shown no run game; they are making serious errors in terms of penalties and special teams; the offensive line is pathetic and Warner is getting slammed; Warner himself has thrown far too many interceptions, even accounting for the top-flight defenses of Tampa Bay and New York Giants; and the defense is sliding back towards its 2000 performance. It could not hold Tampa Bay at all last week.
The loss of some key personnel (Little, Az-Hakim, etc.) has had an effect, but I think the main problems are two-fold. First, opposing defenses know that if they press Warner, the offensive line can't open holes for Faulk any more and rattling Warner is a way to throw off his rhythm. Also, the Rams receivers often seem scared and the team in general doesn't appear to have any drive to win. It's as if they easily concede points and then almost lackadaisically say, oh, maybe we'll come back. They've come close in each of the three losses, but they are lacking the determination to press to the win. This was evident in the Super Bowl, and it's glaring now. I think the arrogance of their offensive-minded coach also is hurting them. These losses do appear to be having a chastening effect with him at least.
This week's game is crucial. If the Rams lose to Dallas, well, I think they can hang it up. They could still finish at .500, but this is a game they can and must win. Even with their decimated offensive line (Pace is out, Nütten is hurt, etc.) they can still win. They're in a very weak division, but that's little consolation. They've got to stop sleepwalking. Or perhaps they can't.
Well they are now the 0-4 Rams. They lost to Dallas 13-10!
Oh my!!
They are this bad! Unbelieveable that they could lose to the incompetent Cowboys.
Start rebuilding St. Louis.
Josh
[quote]Originally posted by George_vikingfan:
Well they are now the 0-4 Rams. They lost to Dallas 13-10!
They are this bad! Unbelieveable that they could lose to the incompetent Cowboys.
Start rebuilding St. Louis.
Josh
[quote]Originally posted by George_vikingfan:
Well they are now the 0-4 Rams. They lost to Dallas 13-10!
[quote]Originally posted by PCC:
This is the year that "Same old sorry assed Rams" will come back into fashion.
Same old sorry assed Rams!
This is the year that "Same old sorry assed Rams" will come back into fashion.
Same old sorry assed Rams!
Seems I was wrong in my September 27 post: the Rams really are that bad.
In all seriousness, and this next comment is not meant to be Husker-bashing,* but wasting a third round drafting pick on the otherwise unwanted Eric Crouch was definitely an indication that some organization's collective head was stuck up its own collective rectum.
I hope the Rams are back next year because their games were always big fun to watch. The Kurt Warner/Marshall Faulk Rams have played in the two most exciting Super Bowls that I've watched ... probably ever.**
__________
* When I want to bash the Cornhuskers, which I do enjoy doing, I do it more directly.
** I did not watch Super Bowls I-VI. I've seen them all since Super Bowl VII, Miami v. Washington. I don't anyone's argued that the first six could match the excitement of the down-to-the last-play games the Rams played in XXXIV and XXXVI.
In all seriousness, and this next comment is not meant to be Husker-bashing,* but wasting a third round drafting pick on the otherwise unwanted Eric Crouch was definitely an indication that some organization's collective head was stuck up its own collective rectum.
I hope the Rams are back next year because their games were always big fun to watch. The Kurt Warner/Marshall Faulk Rams have played in the two most exciting Super Bowls that I've watched ... probably ever.**
__________
* When I want to bash the Cornhuskers, which I do enjoy doing, I do it more directly.
** I did not watch Super Bowls I-VI. I've seen them all since Super Bowl VII, Miami v. Washington. I don't anyone's argued that the first six could match the excitement of the down-to-the last-play games the Rams played in XXXIV and XXXVI.
[quote]Originally posted by Charlie in the Trees:
Seems I was wrong in my September 27 post: the Rams really are that bad.
In all seriousness, and this next comment is not meant to be Husker-bashing,* but wasting a third round drafting pick on the otherwise unwanted Eric Crouch was definitely an indication that some organization's collective head was stuck up its own collective rectum.
Didn't they select another quarterback who was moved to another position? How's that guy doing?
A loud cheer went up in the bar when the Cowboys won--and they didn't appear to be Dallas fans, either. I think a lot of people are ecstatic over the Rams' collapse.
Seems I was wrong in my September 27 post: the Rams really are that bad.
In all seriousness, and this next comment is not meant to be Husker-bashing,* but wasting a third round drafting pick on the otherwise unwanted Eric Crouch was definitely an indication that some organization's collective head was stuck up its own collective rectum.
Didn't they select another quarterback who was moved to another position? How's that guy doing?
A loud cheer went up in the bar when the Cowboys won--and they didn't appear to be Dallas fans, either. I think a lot of people are ecstatic over the Rams' collapse.
[quote]Originally posted by Joe in Philly:
Didn't they select another quarterback who was moved to another position? How's that guy doing?
Steve Bellisari, out of Ohio State, still on their roster as a DB. I don't think he's played a down. (They used a more realistic 6th round pick on him.) The only quarterback conversion experiment that's working is Antwaan Randle El, who seems to be the only person doing anything on offense for the Steelers this season.
By the way, there is never ... NEVER ... a good reason for cheering a Cowboy victory ... EVER ... unless it knocks the 'Skins out of the playoffs without benefitting Dallas in any way.
Didn't they select another quarterback who was moved to another position? How's that guy doing?
Steve Bellisari, out of Ohio State, still on their roster as a DB. I don't think he's played a down. (They used a more realistic 6th round pick on him.) The only quarterback conversion experiment that's working is Antwaan Randle El, who seems to be the only person doing anything on offense for the Steelers this season.
By the way, there is never ... NEVER ... a good reason for cheering a Cowboy victory ... EVER ... unless it knocks the 'Skins out of the playoffs without benefitting Dallas in any way.
Mike Penner in the Los Angeles Times has given the Rams permission to panic (I'd have linked to the story but the Times is a registration site and I thought people would want to see this without having to sign up) [quote]They are panicking in St. Louis, melting down in Missouri, all because the hometown Rams have lost their first three regular-season games, two of them by a touchdown or less.
We'd like to tell them all to get a grip, except we have learned from history and know that St. Louis is too ploddingly literal when it comes to this stuff. Within the last decade, St. Louis has gotten its grip around too many of our favorite things: Jim Edmonds, Mark McGwire, Wayne Gretzky, a once-proud football team known as the Rams.
Clearly, this is a city that lost all sense of decency long ago. Now, just because Kurt Warner throws a few wobblers in September, it's a city that has also lost its mind. From here to the banks of the Mississippi River, you can hear the beached wail: Martz has lost it! He's nothing without Vermeil! (Even though Mike Martz went 14-2 last season with a team that outscored opponents, 503-273. Dick Vermeil, last we checked, still thinks he can return to the Super Bowl with the Kansas City Chief roster and Trent Green as his quarterback.) Warner's arm is dead! His shoulder's shot! His confidence is gone! His psyche was shattered by the loss to New England! Send in Jamie Martin! Warm up Marc Bulger!
(Warner is playing with a bad thumb but doesn't like talking about it because, unlike other Ram quarterbacks we have known, he doesn't like to make excuses. The man has been to two Super Bowls, won two MVP trophies in three years. Think you can spare him a few more quarters? Jamie Martin? We caught Martin's act, just before the Rams packed up the moving vans. You don't want to go there. Marc Bulger? Four syllables, St. Louis: T.J. Rubley.)
We can't win without James Hodgins! He was the real MVP of this team! (James Hodgins is a blocking back. He is sidelined with a foot injury. He should be back some time in October. Marshall Faulk missed two games to injury last season. The Rams still made it to the Super Bowl.)
We never should have let Az Hakim go! We can't spread defenses anymore! (The Rams did not re-sign Hakim during the off-season because he dropped a lot of passes. He has since moved on to Detroit. The Lions, with Az Hakim spreading defenses, are also 0-3.)We never should have let Ryan Tucker go! John St. Clair is a bust! (You might have a point there. St. Louis' offensive line hasn't been the same since Tucker, in a historic end-around, became a Ram who moved to Cleveland.)
Take a deep breath, St. Louis.
The Rams might not be the juggernaut of '99, but this team has something that team never had: four division games against Arizona and Seattle. Does anyone really believe the Rams, even in their current discombobulated state, are going to finish behind the Cardinals and the Seahawks in the new (and devolved) NFC West?
That leaves the Rams chasing San Francisco for first place and the playoffs. The Rams trail the 2-1 49ers by two games, but have two games against the 49ers to erase that gap. The 49ers have issues of their own--generally speaking, the passing game; if you'd rather get personal, Terrell Owens.
Six reasons why the Rams aren't done yet:
1. The schedule. The Rams were hit hard right from the start, with road games at Denver and Tampa Bay, teams that figure to contend for the Super Bowl. Their only home game so far was against the New York Giants, who still know how to tackle and were amped to end a five-game losing streak against the Rams. The schedule eases today--home game against Dallas--and after rivalry games against the 49ers and Raiders, the Rams get a five-game run against Seattle, Arizona, San Diego, Chicago and Washington.
2. Thirteen games to go. It's a long season, and teams do hit down cycles. The '99 Rams lost back-to-back games, in midseason, and went on to win the Super Bowl. The '00 Rams lost three in a row, in November, and still finished 10-6 to make the playoffs--and might have reached another Super Bowl had the much-lamented Hakim not fumbled that fourth-quarter punt in New Orleans.
3. Realignment. From the Ram perspective, the NFL shuffled its divisions just in the nick of time. Old NFC West rival New Orleans is 3-0 after three games against 2001 playoff teams. Atlanta has Michael Vick, meaning Atlanta has a chance to win every game it plays. Carolina won't be undefeated after today, but the Panthers are not the pushovers of seasons past. By swapping six games against that threesome for four against the Cardinals and the Seahawks--a.k.a. A Flock of Seagulls--the Rams definitely traded up.
4. He's Kurt Warner, not Jim Everett. Last week, a columnist for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch actually wrote: "If Warner's stunning decline continues, he'll soon be compared to Jim Everett."
Did I mention there is widespread panic in St. Louis? Warner will never, ever be compared to Everett--note to St. Louis: We were there--until/unless he: a) returns his two league MVP awards to the NFL office;
returns his Super Bowl MVP trophy too; c) persuades everyone to ignore the all-time NFL quarterback ratings, which list Warner No. 1, ahead of Steve Young and Joe Montana and every other quarterback who has played the game; d) sacks himself on national television with another trip to the Super Bowl on the line; e) sacks a talk-show host on national television after the host derisively calls him "Chris Everett," a slanderous insult to a great and gutty tennis player who never sacked herself in the big match against Martina Navratilova; f) ends a season by losing the last 10 games, as Everett did in 1991; g) loses his job to T.J. Rubley; h) loses so many games that home attendance dwindles, giving the team an excuse to look elsewhere, essentially escorting the Rams out of town.
5. The Rams have already moved. Georgia Frontiere and John Shaw got what they wanted, the sweetheart deal of a lifetime, in 1995. There's no more incentive for them to run the team into the ground and kill off fan interest, unless, perhaps, Pottsville is promising a new stadium. This time, it actually makes financial sense to keep the team competitive. Although the whole Eric Crouch affair--burning a third-round pick on a big-name-without-a-position who retires after the exhibition season--sounds suspiciously like vintage Anaheim Rams, circa 1990.
6. Rams-49ers. The division championship will hinge on two games: Oct. 6, Rams at 49ers, and Dec. 30, 49ers at Rams. The Rams have swept the last three season series with the 49ers, which makes today's home game against Dallas so important. A victory over the Cowboys sends the Rams to San Francisco with some regained swagger.
A loss today to the Cowboys?
In that case, St. Louis, you will be granted unconditional permission to panic.
There's the Bowie song Panic in Detroit. The 2002 Remix would be Panic in St. Louis.
Get that fork out of the cutlery drawer, because the Rams are done.
We'd like to tell them all to get a grip, except we have learned from history and know that St. Louis is too ploddingly literal when it comes to this stuff. Within the last decade, St. Louis has gotten its grip around too many of our favorite things: Jim Edmonds, Mark McGwire, Wayne Gretzky, a once-proud football team known as the Rams.
Clearly, this is a city that lost all sense of decency long ago. Now, just because Kurt Warner throws a few wobblers in September, it's a city that has also lost its mind. From here to the banks of the Mississippi River, you can hear the beached wail: Martz has lost it! He's nothing without Vermeil! (Even though Mike Martz went 14-2 last season with a team that outscored opponents, 503-273. Dick Vermeil, last we checked, still thinks he can return to the Super Bowl with the Kansas City Chief roster and Trent Green as his quarterback.) Warner's arm is dead! His shoulder's shot! His confidence is gone! His psyche was shattered by the loss to New England! Send in Jamie Martin! Warm up Marc Bulger!
(Warner is playing with a bad thumb but doesn't like talking about it because, unlike other Ram quarterbacks we have known, he doesn't like to make excuses. The man has been to two Super Bowls, won two MVP trophies in three years. Think you can spare him a few more quarters? Jamie Martin? We caught Martin's act, just before the Rams packed up the moving vans. You don't want to go there. Marc Bulger? Four syllables, St. Louis: T.J. Rubley.)
We can't win without James Hodgins! He was the real MVP of this team! (James Hodgins is a blocking back. He is sidelined with a foot injury. He should be back some time in October. Marshall Faulk missed two games to injury last season. The Rams still made it to the Super Bowl.)
We never should have let Az Hakim go! We can't spread defenses anymore! (The Rams did not re-sign Hakim during the off-season because he dropped a lot of passes. He has since moved on to Detroit. The Lions, with Az Hakim spreading defenses, are also 0-3.)We never should have let Ryan Tucker go! John St. Clair is a bust! (You might have a point there. St. Louis' offensive line hasn't been the same since Tucker, in a historic end-around, became a Ram who moved to Cleveland.)
Take a deep breath, St. Louis.
The Rams might not be the juggernaut of '99, but this team has something that team never had: four division games against Arizona and Seattle. Does anyone really believe the Rams, even in their current discombobulated state, are going to finish behind the Cardinals and the Seahawks in the new (and devolved) NFC West?
That leaves the Rams chasing San Francisco for first place and the playoffs. The Rams trail the 2-1 49ers by two games, but have two games against the 49ers to erase that gap. The 49ers have issues of their own--generally speaking, the passing game; if you'd rather get personal, Terrell Owens.
Six reasons why the Rams aren't done yet:
1. The schedule. The Rams were hit hard right from the start, with road games at Denver and Tampa Bay, teams that figure to contend for the Super Bowl. Their only home game so far was against the New York Giants, who still know how to tackle and were amped to end a five-game losing streak against the Rams. The schedule eases today--home game against Dallas--and after rivalry games against the 49ers and Raiders, the Rams get a five-game run against Seattle, Arizona, San Diego, Chicago and Washington.
2. Thirteen games to go. It's a long season, and teams do hit down cycles. The '99 Rams lost back-to-back games, in midseason, and went on to win the Super Bowl. The '00 Rams lost three in a row, in November, and still finished 10-6 to make the playoffs--and might have reached another Super Bowl had the much-lamented Hakim not fumbled that fourth-quarter punt in New Orleans.
3. Realignment. From the Ram perspective, the NFL shuffled its divisions just in the nick of time. Old NFC West rival New Orleans is 3-0 after three games against 2001 playoff teams. Atlanta has Michael Vick, meaning Atlanta has a chance to win every game it plays. Carolina won't be undefeated after today, but the Panthers are not the pushovers of seasons past. By swapping six games against that threesome for four against the Cardinals and the Seahawks--a.k.a. A Flock of Seagulls--the Rams definitely traded up.
4. He's Kurt Warner, not Jim Everett. Last week, a columnist for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch actually wrote: "If Warner's stunning decline continues, he'll soon be compared to Jim Everett."
Did I mention there is widespread panic in St. Louis? Warner will never, ever be compared to Everett--note to St. Louis: We were there--until/unless he: a) returns his two league MVP awards to the NFL office;
returns his Super Bowl MVP trophy too; c) persuades everyone to ignore the all-time NFL quarterback ratings, which list Warner No. 1, ahead of Steve Young and Joe Montana and every other quarterback who has played the game; d) sacks himself on national television with another trip to the Super Bowl on the line; e) sacks a talk-show host on national television after the host derisively calls him "Chris Everett," a slanderous insult to a great and gutty tennis player who never sacked herself in the big match against Martina Navratilova; f) ends a season by losing the last 10 games, as Everett did in 1991; g) loses his job to T.J. Rubley; h) loses so many games that home attendance dwindles, giving the team an excuse to look elsewhere, essentially escorting the Rams out of town.5. The Rams have already moved. Georgia Frontiere and John Shaw got what they wanted, the sweetheart deal of a lifetime, in 1995. There's no more incentive for them to run the team into the ground and kill off fan interest, unless, perhaps, Pottsville is promising a new stadium. This time, it actually makes financial sense to keep the team competitive. Although the whole Eric Crouch affair--burning a third-round pick on a big-name-without-a-position who retires after the exhibition season--sounds suspiciously like vintage Anaheim Rams, circa 1990.
6. Rams-49ers. The division championship will hinge on two games: Oct. 6, Rams at 49ers, and Dec. 30, 49ers at Rams. The Rams have swept the last three season series with the 49ers, which makes today's home game against Dallas so important. A victory over the Cowboys sends the Rams to San Francisco with some regained swagger.
A loss today to the Cowboys?
In that case, St. Louis, you will be granted unconditional permission to panic.
There's the Bowie song Panic in Detroit. The 2002 Remix would be Panic in St. Louis.
Get that fork out of the cutlery drawer, because the Rams are done.
The Cowgirls beat them
Yes, they really are that bad.
Yes, they really are that bad.
And its now being reported that Warner will be out 8-10 weeks. Too bad for them they don't get to play the Vikes.
These sorry assed Rams are worse than the old sorry assed Rams.
I wonder what Mike Penner of the LA Times has to say now?
[ October 06, 2002: Message edited by: PCC ]
I wonder what Mike Penner of the LA Times has to say now?
[ October 06, 2002: Message edited by: PCC ]
Things are allright again- the Rams suck.
Will they even beat Seattle?
I don't think so. I would have to pick Seattle over the Rams, if you can believe that...
Seems as if the frustration is even getting to Marshall Faulk. Maybe he just heard that Mark Bulger will be the starting QB this weekend! This from ESPN.com:
[quote]On a winless team off to its worst start in nearly four decades, St. Louis Rams running back Marshall Faulk apparently didn't care to discuss it when sports broadcaster Bob Costas came to town this week.
During a Monday taping for this weekend's "Inside the NFL'' program on HBO, Faulk abruptly ended an interview with Costas after being questioned about the Rams' dismal start, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported in a story on its Web site Friday.
During the taping that also included injured Rams quarterback Kurt Warner, Costas managed to get a few short answers from Faulk before asking him, "You've got a team that's 0-5 that by consensus was the best team in football. ... Something's got to be wrong. What do you think it is?''
Faulk's reply: "Don't know. If I knew I'd fix it.''
When Costas pressed Faulk about him becoming more involved in the offense during the Rams' 37-13 loss the previous day at San Francisco -- Faulk ran 18 times for 73 yards and had seven catches for 37 yards -- he motioned with his hands as if calling a timeout.
"I can't do this, Bob,'' Faulk said before standing up, removing his microphone and leaving.
Faulk later did not want to be formally interviewed about the taping but mentioned to reporters at the Rams' practice site this week that he didn't like Costas' questions -- and that he thought Costas was there to stir things up.
Costas said Faulk appeared uncomfortable from the interview's outset.
"I really wish for Marshall's sake he had declined the interview,'' Costas said. "He was on the fence about doing it. He had to be coaxed into it (by a Rams official). I could tell he wasn't comfortable when he walked in.
"He's a bright guy, and I think it occurred to him that as we got a few questions into it that if he answered with any candor he would be in a no-win situation. So I think he decided to cut his losses.''
Costas, who continued the interview with Warner, said he was not off-base with his questions about the Rams' woes.
"There are times in interviews where I might be tougher than some interviewers, but the line of questioning was what any competent interviewer would use,'' Costas said. "There was no other line of questioning possible.''
Regardless, Costas said he holds no hard feelings toward Faulk.
"As I said on the set (after a tape of the interview aired), 'Marshall Faulk is a good guy.' He's an extraordinary competitor and is extremely frustrated,'' Costas said.
[ October 12, 2002: Message edited by: George_vikingfan ]
[quote]On a winless team off to its worst start in nearly four decades, St. Louis Rams running back Marshall Faulk apparently didn't care to discuss it when sports broadcaster Bob Costas came to town this week.
During a Monday taping for this weekend's "Inside the NFL'' program on HBO, Faulk abruptly ended an interview with Costas after being questioned about the Rams' dismal start, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported in a story on its Web site Friday.
During the taping that also included injured Rams quarterback Kurt Warner, Costas managed to get a few short answers from Faulk before asking him, "You've got a team that's 0-5 that by consensus was the best team in football. ... Something's got to be wrong. What do you think it is?''
Faulk's reply: "Don't know. If I knew I'd fix it.''
When Costas pressed Faulk about him becoming more involved in the offense during the Rams' 37-13 loss the previous day at San Francisco -- Faulk ran 18 times for 73 yards and had seven catches for 37 yards -- he motioned with his hands as if calling a timeout.
"I can't do this, Bob,'' Faulk said before standing up, removing his microphone and leaving.
Faulk later did not want to be formally interviewed about the taping but mentioned to reporters at the Rams' practice site this week that he didn't like Costas' questions -- and that he thought Costas was there to stir things up.
Costas said Faulk appeared uncomfortable from the interview's outset.
"I really wish for Marshall's sake he had declined the interview,'' Costas said. "He was on the fence about doing it. He had to be coaxed into it (by a Rams official). I could tell he wasn't comfortable when he walked in.
"He's a bright guy, and I think it occurred to him that as we got a few questions into it that if he answered with any candor he would be in a no-win situation. So I think he decided to cut his losses.''
Costas, who continued the interview with Warner, said he was not off-base with his questions about the Rams' woes.
"There are times in interviews where I might be tougher than some interviewers, but the line of questioning was what any competent interviewer would use,'' Costas said. "There was no other line of questioning possible.''
Regardless, Costas said he holds no hard feelings toward Faulk.
"As I said on the set (after a tape of the interview aired), 'Marshall Faulk is a good guy.' He's an extraordinary competitor and is extremely frustrated,'' Costas said.
[ October 12, 2002: Message edited by: George_vikingfan ]
I saw the actual interview today on "Inside the NFL" and for the few moments he did the interview, he was very guarded in the 3 or so words he uttered. Costas and Collinsworth suspect he didn't want to indict his offensive line.
[quote]Originally posted by Charlie in the Trees:
To answer the question: the Rams aren't this bad. They even still have a legit shot at the play-offs because the 49ers are having problems too and the other two teams in the division (the Cardinals and the Seahawks) are a lock at staying pathetic all season long. The Rams could get it together and go 9-7, which could win this division.
But what's the point? The Eagles are a lock to win the NFC and go the Super Bowl. Everyone else in the NFC -- Saints included -- are playing for draft positioning.
Charlie, you were right. The Rams beat the only undefeated team in the league, the Oakland Raiders, quite decisively. They energized Faulk (who rushed for 158 yards), got superb play out of their third-string QB (Marc Bulger), they made far fewer mistakes and sloppy plays than in the first five games, and Lovie Smith's defense stopped Oakland repeatedly when it counted.
They played like the winning Rams of last year--the offense was sparkling and the defense was tight. I don't know how long they can keep this up, but I think Mike Martz has come to realize he MUST run the ball to make both his top-flight passing game and all those trick plays he loves work. And the Rams will NOT win in the defense-rich NFC if they don't play it themselves.
They could probably go 8-8 at this point and finish second in their division. I still think they have a few games to lose, but they could beat Arizona, Seattle, and perhaps win the second go-round against SF, especially since they'll play in the Edward D. Jones Dome in the Lou.
To answer the question: the Rams aren't this bad. They even still have a legit shot at the play-offs because the 49ers are having problems too and the other two teams in the division (the Cardinals and the Seahawks) are a lock at staying pathetic all season long. The Rams could get it together and go 9-7, which could win this division.
But what's the point? The Eagles are a lock to win the NFC and go the Super Bowl. Everyone else in the NFC -- Saints included -- are playing for draft positioning.
Charlie, you were right. The Rams beat the only undefeated team in the league, the Oakland Raiders, quite decisively. They energized Faulk (who rushed for 158 yards), got superb play out of their third-string QB (Marc Bulger), they made far fewer mistakes and sloppy plays than in the first five games, and Lovie Smith's defense stopped Oakland repeatedly when it counted.
They played like the winning Rams of last year--the offense was sparkling and the defense was tight. I don't know how long they can keep this up, but I think Mike Martz has come to realize he MUST run the ball to make both his top-flight passing game and all those trick plays he loves work. And the Rams will NOT win in the defense-rich NFC if they don't play it themselves.
They could probably go 8-8 at this point and finish second in their division. I still think they have a few games to lose, but they could beat Arizona, Seattle, and perhaps win the second go-round against SF, especially since they'll play in the Edward D. Jones Dome in the Lou.
Reports are that Faulk is like a man possessed now. Torry Holt was very positive in an interview last night on ESPN and said that everyone is rallying around Bulger as their starting QB until Warner returns. With the new playoff format, a few slip-ups by the 49ers and a rally by the Rams could put them right there in the thick of things come December.
[quote]Originally posted by Charlie in the Trees:
The Eagles are a lock to win the NFC and go the Super Bowl.
Good one CITT -- nice laugh for me this afternoon -- they may win the NFC Least, but Favre and the Pack have hit their stride and are now the team to beat in the conference.
But -- the horror -- my partner has decided to support the Rams having read that QB Bulger went to his high school -- I'm hoping they go 1-15!
The Eagles are a lock to win the NFC and go the Super Bowl.
Good one CITT -- nice laugh for me this afternoon -- they may win the NFC Least, but Favre and the Pack have hit their stride and are now the team to beat in the conference.
But -- the horror -- my partner has decided to support the Rams having read that QB Bulger went to his high school -- I'm hoping they go 1-15!
The bottom line in the NFC will be home field. If Green Bay gets it, book them to San Diego. If not, it's wide open. Lambeau in January may be the best home advantage in sports.
[quote]Originally posted by DCBucky:
Favre and the Pack have hit their stride and are now the team to beat in the conference.
Wow, we have an actual comedian on the board...this is the funniest thing I've read in ages!
Favre and the Pack have hit their stride and are now the team to beat in the conference.
Wow, we have an actual comedian on the board...this is the funniest thing I've read in ages!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.