 LOOKING AHEAD, BY RANDY KARRAKER (Oct 26) |
||
| Back
to the Main Page FEATURES- The E-Zine's Quarterback Watch- -Front Office Debate- Ram-ble's Offseason Analyses Zack Neruda's FOD Analysis "E-ZINE" Fan Profiles- GRITS Ram Fan Smack Chick The HERD's home- RAMS Message Board Add yourself to The HERD's Official Roster (guestbook), if you think you are man enough! The HERD's ULTIMATE link page-add your favorite here! |
HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE? A
.500 record the rest of the way obviously, would put the Rams at 11-5. San Francisco would
have to go 8-1 to TIE for the division crown. Ain't going to happen. Dallas plays at Indy, at Minnesota, hosts Green Bay in the next three weeks. They still have Miami, and at New England. In comparison to the Rams schedule, there's no way they do better for home field. Detroit still has the Rams (big game, as it turns out), plus two with Tampa, at Green Bay, host Washington & Denver, and at Minnesota. More losses than the Rams. Washington still has Buffalo, then close at Indy, at San Fran and Miami at home. Maybe the biggest threat to the Rams home field throughout, although that could fall apart with Snyder's meddling... that leaves...Green Bay. They host Seattle, visit Dallas, San Francisco, Minnesota and Tampa the rest of the way. It's going to be hard for them to them to be better than 11-5. If the Rams stay healthy and focused, home field throughout the playoffs actually looks kind of like a lock to me. ARE THE 99 RAMS LIKE THE 98 VIKINGS? NO! Randall Cunningham is immature. Kurt Warner isn't. Anyone who has paid attention to the league for a while knows about Cunningham. Everyone but Dennis Green knew Cunningham would eventually fail, as he did in the NFC Championship game. Torry Holt is mature. Randy Moss isn't. Minnesota lost half of their defensive line from last year. (Ball and Alexander, plus Jason Fisk, then traded Colinet for Ball). The Rams' D-line is under contract. Minnesota also lost a key backup at O-Line (Everett Lindsay) and their starting fullback (Charles Evans). The Rams could lose Miller, but like what they have behind him. Holcombe will be around. As football fans know, blocking is important. Thus, the offensive line and the fullback are important. Robert Smith, like Chris Chandler last year, had an unusually healthy season. When that big play threat is hurt, it makes a huge difference for Minnie). When they traded Johnson, the Vikes wasted the pick for '99 by taking Culpepper. They could still have Johnson, and try to win now with him, rather than be so anxious to get rid of him. Charlie Armey won't let that happen here. If any deal is made with a QB (and I don't think it will be), it'll be made to improve the team for the immediate future. One reason sports teams like the Yankees, Braves, Red Wings and 49ers have been able to sustain success over a long period of time is the maturity of their players. When players become concerned about their own numbers (Randy Moss complaining ad nauseum about not getting the ball) or have a history of immaturity (Cunningham not taking his playbook with him to Las Vegas the week his wife gave birth before a playoff game), it doesn't translate into long term team success If Martz leaves, Saunders and Hanifan have a 100% grasp of the offense. No question this is Martz' baby, but Saunders and Hanifan both have an intimate knowlege of the Coryell offense. The Vikes OC Ray Sherman has failed as an OC with the Jets and Steelers. And Sherman wasn't with the Vikes when Billick was the OC. (Actually, Chip Myers was given the job and passed away. Sherman was basically an emergency replacement.) By the way, Martz already had the Rams OC job before Saunders was turned down as K.C.'s head coach. But Turner---before being retained in Washinton---was Vermeil's first choice, Martz his second. The stability of the Ram organization is much greater than Minnesota's, which had undergone an ownership change and has a coach that craved more power. A Rams decline certainly can happen...it's just not as likely. Weird to say, but the Rams are just a better organization now than the Vikes are without Jeff Diamond. RAMS QBS & THE MARKET: The way the system is set up, it doesn't really matter at what point in a contract you trade a qb, unless you've just signed them to a big deal and can't take the cap hit. Does Warner's contract status matter in all this? If the Rams wait until after the 2000 season to make a decision on who their guy is, the team that they send that QB to will (A) plan on signing him long term, like Buffalo did with Rob Johnson (one NFL start before being traded for a #1 and a #3, or (B) use the franchise tag on him to keep him, like the Colts did with Harbaugh a few years back. As far as market value, because of the system, the Rams can place a tag on Warner, and a team signing him will have to give up at least a pair of #1's. So, the team holding the player has the upper hand. You never have to worry about market value with a good starting QB. Bottom line, the Rams have no plans to decide on their quarterback after this season. They have both locked up at reasonable prices next year, Green's market value will be higher when proven healthy, and they know they'll need both of 'em. So obviously, Green must prove his worth as a starter in order to determine his value, so there's really no point in making a move until after the 2000 season. And no need to worry about it now. |
|