Quote
zn
Quote
dzrams
Yeah, I don't accept that narrative.
Because of all the teams that had winning seasons after a move? Especially a move across state lines and not in a strike year.
LA reporters were saying BEFORE the season that the move would have an effect.
It's obviously not the only thing that went wrong in 2016 (Gurley not being himself being a big one)...but to deny it had an effect strikes me as participating in just plain ordinary denial.
Either way, you missed the point of the post.
The point of the post was that the Rams had talent on hand or they would not have won in 2017. So it follows that they were NOT as bad on acquiring personnel as many tried to suggest before the season .
....
I don't even accept the question you asked about winning seasons after a move as the right question or a particularly informative question. Way too small of a sample size
for me to even say it's a factor or how much of a factor.
As you probably know, I agree with your overall point regarding the talent on hand and the competency of the personnel department. I've been on record about that many times and we've long shared similar views on it.
Where we disagree, beyond the effect of the move issue, is on how large of a part coaching played in the sub par results of the past. The reason I took issue to the narrative is because it seemed that you were saying the effect of the move was the primary reason for the failures.
I happen to believe that coaching - or the lack of good coaching - was the primary issue. I know you already disagree with my stance and that's fine; we've mowed that lawn many times.
At any rate, apart from the disagreements, you're not gonna find a stronger proponent than me of your overall point that lack of talent wasn't the issue.