Home› Sports Talk

Rams fire Linehan after 0-4 start

MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942 ✭
in Sports Talk
No surprise as this was widely speculated on the NFL post game shows yesterday. There is some talk that Jim Haslett might be the next Rams coach.

Comments

  • bigred1bigred1 Posts: 667
    Pregame shows as well.
  • larryallen73larryallen73 Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭
    I am a Ram's fan but I would be happy to go 0 and 16 and get a good draft pick. At this point the season has no hope of success.
  • MeteoriteGuyMeteoriteGuy Posts: 7,140 ✭✭


    << <i>I am a Ram's fan but I would be happy to go 0 and 16 and get a good draft pick. At this point the season has no hope of success. >>



    Sorry, the Rams go 3-16 and get 2nd pick to the Chiefs 2-16. We could use a certain Heisman QB.
    Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards.
    Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
  • BlackborderBlackborder Posts: 2,797 ✭


    << <i>

    << <i>I am a Ram's fan but I would be happy to go 0 and 16 and get a good draft pick. At this point the season has no hope of success. >>



    Sorry, the Rams go 3-16 and get 2nd pick to the Chiefs 2-16. We could use a certain Heisman QB. >>



    Other than the "greatest show on turf" abberation they had for a couple of years, glad to see the Georgia Frontiere era is back in full swing.
  • yawie99yawie99 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭
    I think most franchises would take a 2- to 4-year aberration that yields a championship even if it means enduring some brutal years once it all comes to an end. In fact, I think the NFL, more so than any other professional league in the U.S., is set up to produce such results. The Patriots deserve respect for being freaks of nature, but look at some of the recent Super Bowl participants. Does anybody expect Seattle or Chicago to make it back anytime soon? Or even Indy? They look awful right now.

    But, yeah, I'm all for a 1-win season and the No. 1 pick in '09.
    imageimageimageimageimageimage
  • JackWESQJackWESQ Posts: 2,133 ✭✭✭
    If after the 49ers won Super Bowl XXIX in 1995, you had asked me how many Super Bowls the 49ers would win in the next TWENTY YEARS, my response would have been "at least one."

    Well, this current season (2008) is the 14th season since the 49ers won their last Super Bowl and we all know how "close" the 49ers are to winning another Super Bowl (read: I can't see it happening any earlier than 5-6 years and that's assuming all the planets line up.)

    So if you ask me would I take one Super Bowl victory now for 20 guaranteed miserable seasons, my answer is absolutely yes.

    And that's what I don't understand. You always hear people saying "I don't want to mortgage our future." But the reality is, intended or otherwise, your team has been mortgaging its future. If you're the Bengals, Lions, Falcons, Cardinals, etc., you've been mortgaging your future since at least 1980, if not earlier.

    None of those teams have won a Super Bowl in the combined 108 seasons. If in 1980, one of those teams said, "forget it, I'm going to do everything I can this season, e.g. sign every free agent, trade every draft pick, etc., to win the Super Bowl this season", I'm sure one of those teams would have won at least one Super Bowl. But they didn't and they haven't and they won't.

    And I'll say again, THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR WINNING NOW. Fans don't care about tomorrow. Only owners and management care about tomorrow. Owners and management want to win TODAY AND TOMORROW. The problem is, it is very, very hard to win today and tomorrow.

    /s/ JackWESQ
    image
  • CDsNutsCDsNuts Posts: 10,092 ✭
    If after the 49ers won Super Bowl XXIX in 1995, you had asked me how many Super Bowls the 49ers would win in the next TWENTY YEARS, my response would have been "at least one."

    Well, this current season (2008) is the 14th season since the 49ers won their last Super Bowl and we all know how "close" the 49ers are to winning another Super Bowl (read: I can't see it happening any earlier than 5-6 years and that's assuming all the planets line up.)

    So if you ask me would I take one Super Bowl victory now for 20 guaranteed miserable seasons, my answer is absolutely yes.

    And that's what I don't understand. You always hear people saying "I don't want to mortgage our future." But the reality is, intended or otherwise, your team has been mortgaging its future. If you're the Bengals, Lions, Falcons, Cardinals, etc., you've been mortgaging your future since at least 1980, if not earlier.

    None of those teams have won a Super Bowl in the combined 108 seasons. If in 1980, one of those teams said, "forget it, I'm going to do everything I can this season, e.g. sign every free agent, trade every draft pick, etc., to win the Super Bowl this season", I'm sure one of those teams would have won at least one Super Bowl. But they didn't and they haven't and they won't.

    And I'll say again, THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR WINNING NOW. Fans don't care about tomorrow. Only owners and management care about tomorrow. Owners and management want to win TODAY AND TOMORROW. The problem is, it is very, very hard to win today and tomorrow.

    /s/ JackWESQ



    This entire post makes no sense. If you guaranteed a GM a spot in the conference finals, they would absolutely "mortgage their future" for it. What they're saying when they make that statement is that they're not willing to sacrifice the next 10 years for a chance at getting there, especially when they don't know if the players they're getting will make their team good enough. Are they supposed to trade all their draft picks for guys that are good right now? Do you understand how much time it takes to learn a playbook and have everybody on the team on the same page? If this offseason the Lions trade all their draft picks for the next 8 years for Jay Cutler, Ladanian Tomlinson, a WR, 3 O Lineman, and 5 defensive stars, you think they're going to be in the Super Bowl next year? If so then you know nothing about football.

    It's not like baseball where you can sign any free agent you want for any stupid amount of money. There's a salary cap, and the teams that are able to work within its constraints the best are the ones that thrive. The Patriots are always good because many veterans are willing to take paycuts in order to play there. Seau, Moss, Jordan, Harrison, Brischi, O'Neal, Vrabel and Seymour all could make a ton more money somewhere else, which allows the Pats to have the money to pay guys like Brady, Adalius Thomas, Ty Warren and Wes Welker. You think any of these guys would be willing to take a paycut to play with the Rams?

    Fact of the matter is the best front offices put their team in the best possible spot to contend every year, and hopefully one of those years catches and they go all the way. It's no accident that the Pats, Steelers, Colts, Ravens, Eagles, Titans and Broncos are always in the playoffs, and teams like the Saints, Bengals, Lions, Cardinals and Chiefs are never there. Their front offices make bad moves (often bad signings where they misevaluate talent or poor use of draft choices) and the coaching staff is a constant mess. You don't target one or two years and completely forget about your team for the years following. You build a strong program and make it so when pieces of your team go missing, via free agency or injury, new guys can step in right away. The Patriots lost their best player and team leader in the first quarter of the first game, yet they're still going to make the playoffs. You think that's an accident? They built through the draft, added one or two players each year through free agency, and built a strong foundation for the following decade. At least one of those years everything's bound to go your way (no killer injuries, right mix of players, rookies overperforming) and you get to the Superbowl.

Sign In or Register to comment.