Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

A very thought provoking post by Aeneas1...

December 10, 2016 06:29AM
Tends to really dilute the "Fisher inherited a depleted roster" mantra as an excuse for mediocrity 5 years later...

Here's Aeneas1...


only 4 guys who played offense or defense for the rams in 2011 are still with the team, i.e. only 4 remain from before fisher took over as head coach, they include quinn, saffold, kendricks and sims - so is this overhaul a valid excuse for why the rams are sitting at just 4-8 in fisher's 5th year on the job, a valid excuse for fisher's rams looking at a 5th consecutive losing season? nope.

here's a look at how many offensive or defensive guys from the 2011 season are still on the rosters of ten 2016 teams close to a earning a postseason spot - note: special teams players are excluded, i.e. punters, kickers, long snappers, returners, gunners, etc.

the 10-3 raiders:
0 - no offensive or defensive guys from the 2011 season are still on the team.

the 8-4 lions:
2 - one offensive guy and one defensive guy, including stafford (qb) and levy (lb). note: pettigrew (te) would have made it three guys but he hasn't played a snap all season and was released yesterday.

the 8-4 broncos:
4 - two offensive and two defensive guys, including harris (db), thomas (wr), miller (lb), and green (te).

the 8-4 giants:
4 - two offensive guys and two defensive guys, including manning (qb), pierre-paul (dl), cruz (wr), and beatty (ol). note: beatty has only played in 5 of the giants 12 games.

the 7-5 falcons:
4 - two offensive guys and two defensive guys, including ryan (qb), jones (wr), babineaux (dl) and weatherspoon (lb). note: weatherspoon has been limited to just 4 games this season.

the 10-3 chiefs:
6 - one offensive guy and five defensive guys, including johnson (lb), berry (db), hali (dl), bailey (dl), houston (lb) and charles (rb). - note: charles has only played in three games, houston in just four and bailey in just five, i.e. three of the six guys from the 2011 roster have played in only, roughly, a third of the 2016 games.

the 8-3-1 seahawks:
6 - 1 offensive guy and 5 defensive guys, including wright (lb), sherman (db), baldwin (wr), thomas (db), chancellor (db) and morgan (lb). note: morgan has only played in 5 games this season.

the 11-1 cowboys:
7 - four offensive guys and three defensive guys, including free (ol), witten (te), lee (lb), smith (ol), bryant (wr), church (db) and scandrick (db). note: romo (qb) would have made it 8 guys but he hasn't played a snap all season.

the 10-2 patriots:
8 - 5 offensive guys and 3 defensive guys, including edelman (wr), chung (db), mccourty (lb), solder (ol), cannon (ol), ninkovich (lb), gronkowski (te) and brady (qb). note: vollmer (ol) would have made it 9 guys but he hasn't played a snap all season.

the 7-5 ravens:
7 - 3 offensive guys and four defensive guys, including flacco (qb), webb (db), mcclellan (dl), pitta (te), suggs (lb), smith (db) and yanda (ol).
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

  A very thought provoking post by Aeneas1...

Rams431128December 10, 2016 06:29AM

  a very red herring argument.

zn548December 10, 2016 06:33AM

  many posters here used the worst roster NFL history

ferragamo79376December 10, 2016 07:51AM

  Along with the youngest team in the NFL...

jemach366December 10, 2016 01:05PM

  Re: many posters here used the worst roster NFL history

zn324December 11, 2016 03:28AM

  Re: a very red herring argument.

Rams43326December 10, 2016 08:00AM

  Re: a very red herring argument.

guinnessram289December 10, 2016 09:48AM

  Re: a very red herring argument.

zn230December 11, 2016 03:17AM

  Re: a very red herring argument.

Rams43186December 11, 2016 09:54AM

  Re: a very red herring argument.

max185December 11, 2016 10:11AM

  Those teams have QBs

Zooey319December 10, 2016 06:46AM

  Those teams have QBs: Regardless of who the HC is?

Anonymous User405December 10, 2016 07:35AM

  Okay

Zooey400December 10, 2016 07:47AM

  The development of Goff.....

HighPlainsDrifter451December 10, 2016 08:00AM

  Re: The development of Goff.....

zn278December 10, 2016 03:51PM

  Re: The development of Goff.....

Zooey325December 10, 2016 05:19PM

  Re: Okay

21Dog197December 11, 2016 04:06AM

  IMO much of the time that's true

LesBaker321December 10, 2016 07:50AM

  Re: IMO much of the time that's true

Anonymous User316December 10, 2016 08:09AM

  He had Bradford.

no name250December 10, 2016 01:18PM

  Re: He had Bradford.

zn199December 11, 2016 02:51AM

  Not sure it's all going to be on Goff

NewMexicoRam559December 10, 2016 05:18PM

  stuff

zn193December 11, 2016 03:09AM

  But will Goff be able to get the kind of experience he needs?

NewMexicoRam411December 11, 2016 03:37AM

  sure

zn308December 11, 2016 03:39AM

  I post every year this same argument

ferragamo79309December 10, 2016 07:53AM

  Re: I post every year this same argument

poplarbluffman310December 10, 2016 10:07AM

  Wrong!

BobCarl247December 10, 2016 07:57AM