Quote
Rams43
I wasn’t arguing or fighting. You had said that you didn’t believe that a QB could overcome or compensate for a subpar OL.
I was merely suggesting one way that Stafford possibly could and that you might be pleasantly surprised by it.
I;ve never believed that. Back in 2007 posters used to dump on Bulger for the same reason and argued that the Rams having the worst OL injuries since I've followed them shouldn't be considered a factor. Since that debate I have said that I have seen Brady and Wilson compensate for poor OLs in years where those units had heavy injuries, though that only went so far. So I ended up adding Brady and Wilson to the short list of qbs who have actually done that, but other than that, it's just not a real thing.
But none of that is relevant--cause in fact it looks like the Rams OL will be solid (barring multiple injuries). Plus Stafford will have a running game, and unlike recent years in Detroit the Rams defense will be solid at least. It will be a good showcase for him. He won't have to try and compensate for a weak OL, like he had to--and couldn't--in some of his years with the Lions.
And I said from the first day his experience will matter. I like the fact that someone with that much physical talent is also an experienced "seen it all" type savvy vet. If I am predicting anything it's not that he will do well--that's not a prediction, we all know that will happen--it;s that McVay will be a better offensive coach as a result of Stafford.
And don't worry, there's no hostility. I was just not sure why you would respond to a long post about the OL and the advantages Stafford will have with the Rams by disagreeing with one line about NFL history and how no one can name very many qbs who did overcome deficient OLs (and Stafford in Detroit was not one of them.)
...
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2021 02:46PM by zn.
