RolandDeschain
Well-known member
I predict that when we go 16-0 in the regular season next year and someone makes a thread about it between week 17 and wild card weekend, Dom will chime in and say it doesn't matter whatsoever.
HawkAroundTheClock":3to5wezv said:rdskns4eva":3to5wezv said:Thats why the lowly Rams, and they are lowly, took you to the wire.
Washington lost to the lowly Rams. They scored 31 on WAS. In two games against Seattle, they scored 32.
rdskns4eva":3to5wezv said:Redskins have won 5 of last 6 at home and 5 in a row at home. Last home lost was Nov 11th.
The "5 of last 6" would be redundant if they in fact won their last 5. They actually won their last 4 in a row at home.
Hawks46":3tqa8wfk said:That "lowly" Rams team would've gone to the playoffs at least in your division, if not won it.
The Rams scare me, more than San Fran does. They have a crap load of draft picks from you guys, and one of the best coaches in the NFL. They probably already have the most physically talented DL in the NFL right now, and 2 good CBs. All they lack is weapons on the outside and a replacement for Stephen Jackson.
rdskns4eva":1j43kb2d said:The Rams are not a good team.
And that... is why most of us ignore Dom. His 'tude" is depressing.RolandDeschain":2ld5e770 said:I predict that when we go 16-0 in the regular season next year and someone makes a thread about it between week 17 and wild card weekend, Dom will chime in and say it doesn't matter whatsoever.
RolandDeschain":1jfqds7j said:rdskns4eva":1jfqds7j said:The Rams are not a good team.
They ended up having one of the hardest schedules in the league, and they beat two inter-divisional playoff teams once each, with a tie on a 3rd and loss on the 4th. With a mediocre QB. I don't see how you can laugh the Rams off, you should actually watch some of their games from this year; that team's rapidly on the rise, and Fisher has them playing very well, considering their skill sets. I wouldn't call them a "good" team as of right now, but there's a good chance the Skins don't win their division had you replaced a team in your division with the Rams this year. I know you don't want to admit it, but there it is.
That strength of schedule chart is for this year, by the way; meaning it's not showing how hard their schedule looked to be entering the season, but how hard it turned out to have been based on the records of all the teams this year, which makes it actually accurate to this season.
rdskns4eva":s7uhakzi said:Hawks46":s7uhakzi said:That "lowly" Rams team would've gone to the playoffs at least in your division, if not won it.
The Rams scare me, more than San Fran does. They have a crap load of draft picks from you guys, and one of the best coaches in the NFL. They probably already have the most physically talented DL in the NFL right now, and 2 good CBs. All they lack is weapons on the outside and a replacement for Stephen Jackson.
Get that crap out of here...With Sam Bradford? PLEASE!!
Again, Just because a team is good IN DIVISION, does not mean they are viable outsite of it
Rams have a 6-5-1 conf record. 4 of those wins were agaisnt divisional opponents. and they had a tie in division, so they were 2-5 in conf in non divisional games. They were 1-3 outside the conf, so that means they are 3-8 in non divisinal games. The Rams are not a good team.
rdskns4eva":32kewrwe said:Also, the Rams lost to
Lions lol
A Rookie led Dolphins team lol
The Sorry Jets...at home lol
The Vikings who have no quarterback
Bears, fine
Packers, fine
Pats, fine
Seahawks, fine
SOS is nice...if you are good as you say they are, they would beat good teams. Outside of the Redskins the Hawks (again, in Division), they havent beat anyone of consequence and they've lost to some very bad teams. The Rams have no quarterback and until then, they are going to suck.
So again, no, the Rams could not all of a sudden come into the NFC east, wear three of 4 teams play in cold weather, snow and rain and all of a sudden be able to beat the Dallas Cowboys, Washington Redskins and New York Giants on a consistent basis or take the Division. They MIGHT be able to be the Eagles consistently.
Sarlacc83":4o8mht7f said:Did you seriously have to go through all that work to figure out what their record is in non-divisional games only to STILL get it wrong?
Here, let me help:
7-8-1 MINUS 4-1-1 = 3 - 7.
Wow. Just. Wow.
LOL! I can't wait to see Rdskns4eva try to talk his way out of these posts. Have at it, Rdskns. :snack:AF_Hawk":4o8mht7f said:You do realize the Redskins actually lost to the Rams right? Or did you just start paying attention during the 7 game win streak?
http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320916014
I forgot to add that Stephen Jackson wasn't even in this game. You can't call a team garbage when your own team can't even beat them.
Sarlacc83":1krabrvh said:rdskns4eva":1krabrvh said:Hawks46":1krabrvh said:That "lowly" Rams team would've gone to the playoffs at least in your division, if not won it.
The Rams scare me, more than San Fran does. They have a crap load of draft picks from you guys, and one of the best coaches in the NFL. They probably already have the most physically talented DL in the NFL right now, and 2 good CBs. All they lack is weapons on the outside and a replacement for Stephen Jackson.
Get that crap out of here...With Sam Bradford? PLEASE!!
Again, Just because a team is good IN DIVISION, does not mean they are viable outsite of it
Rams have a 6-5-1 conf record. 4 of those wins were agaisnt divisional opponents. and they had a tie in division, so they were 2-5 in conf in non divisional games. They were 1-3 outside the conf, so that means they are 3-8 in non divisinal games. The Rams are not a good team.
Did you seriously have to go through all that work to figure out what their record is in non-divisional games only to STILL get it wrong?
Here, let me help:
7-8-1 MINUS 4-1-1 = 3 - 7.
Wow. Just. Wow.
AF_Hawk":15h6pemx said:rdskns4eva":15h6pemx said:Also, the Rams lost to
Lions lol
A Rookie led Dolphins team lol
The Sorry Jets...at home lol
The Vikings who have no quarterback
Bears, fine
Packers, fine
Pats, fine
Seahawks, fine
SOS is nice...if you are good as you say they are, they would beat good teams. Outside of the Redskins the Hawks (again, in Division), they havent beat anyone of consequence and they've lost to some very bad teams. The Rams have no quarterback and until then, they are going to suck.
So again, no, the Rams could not all of a sudden come into the NFC east, wear three of 4 teams play in cold weather, snow and rain and all of a sudden be able to beat the Dallas Cowboys, Washington Redskins and New York Giants on a consistent basis or take the Division. They MIGHT be able to be the Eagles consistently.
You do realize the Redskins actually lost to the Rams right? Or did you just start paying attention during the 7 game win streak?
http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320916014
I forgot to add that Stephen Jackson wasn't even in this game. You can't call a team garbage when your own team can't even beat them.
rdskns4eva":1qedboff said:Seahawk Sailor":1qedboff said:burggold75":1qedboff said:and the skins road record was 5-3....hmmm
True, but we didn't get to play the Cowboys and Eagles on the road.
You get to play the Rams and the Cardinals lol.
C'mon, everyone knows Divisional games are tough. Thats why the lowly Rams, and they are lowly, took you to the wire.
rdskns4eva":h2zmshpp said:AF_Hawk":h2zmshpp said:rdskns4eva":h2zmshpp said:Also, the Rams lost to
Lions lol
A Rookie led Dolphins team lol
The Sorry Jets...at home lol
The Vikings who have no quarterback
Bears, fine
Packers, fine
Pats, fine
Seahawks, fine
SOS is nice...if you are good as you say they are, they would beat good teams. Outside of the Redskins the Hawks (again, in Division), they havent beat anyone of consequence and they've lost to some very bad teams. The Rams have no quarterback and until then, they are going to suck.
So again, no, the Rams could not all of a sudden come into the NFC east, wear three of 4 teams play in cold weather, snow and rain and all of a sudden be able to beat the Dallas Cowboys, Washington Redskins and New York Giants on a consistent basis or take the Division. They MIGHT be able to be the Eagles consistently.
You do realize the Redskins actually lost to the Rams right? Or did you just start paying attention during the 7 game win streak?
http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320916014
I forgot to add that Stephen Jackson wasn't even in this game. You can't call a team garbage when your own team can't even beat them.
The Patriots lost to the Cards...I guess that means the Cardinals arent a garbage team, right? Get real.
Barthawk":b2ichm95 said:Dude- don't be a douche... the Cards vs the Pats have no relevancy in this argument whatsoever.. you have so busing running your mouth about how awful that Rams are that you forgot your team lost to them 31-28. Now, week 2 of the NFL season really means nothing now because both teams are playing much better now, but don't rationalize much more than that..
We are very open to informed discussions around here so if you can contribute, go for it, otherwise pack sand.
rdskns4eva":x1rnos21 said:Barthawk":x1rnos21 said:Dude- don't be a douche... the Cards vs the Pats have no relevancy in this argument whatsoever.. you have so busing running your mouth about how awful that Rams are that you forgot your team lost to them 31-28. Now, week 2 of the NFL season really means nothing now because both teams are playing much better now, but don't rationalize much more than that..
We are very open to informed discussions around here so if you can contribute, go for it, otherwise pack sand.
It DOES have relevancy. What did the poster say..."You can't call a team garbage when your own team can't even beat them."
Sure you can. The Cardinals beat the Patriots and the cardinals are a garage team. That was my point.
Seahawk Sailor":3p2wfoc3 said:rdskns4eva":3p2wfoc3 said:Barthawk":3p2wfoc3 said:Dude- don't be a douche... the Cards vs the Pats have no relevancy in this argument whatsoever.. you have so busing running your mouth about how awful that Rams are that you forgot your team lost to them 31-28. Now, week 2 of the NFL season really means nothing now because both teams are playing much better now, but don't rationalize much more than that..
We are very open to informed discussions around here so if you can contribute, go for it, otherwise pack sand.
It DOES have relevancy. What did the poster say..."You can't call a team garbage when your own team can't even beat them."
Sure you can. The Cardinals beat the Patriots and the cardinals are a garage team. That was my point.
If you recall, at that point in the year, they were undefeated and one of the hottest teams in the league. Their defense had yet to wear down from the offense using it like a rented mule. Once that happened, the team crumbled, even if the defense was still rather good all year long.