Is the writing on the wall invisible?

[Thordaddy]

Fishers "philosophy" is a tried an true one that has never quit working, some people went all copy cat when Martz set the league on it's ear and forgot that in that one win we were a yard short of overtime when we were at our GSOT best against Fisher and had lost to his "flash in the pan philosophy" once before that year.

As far as whether Sam is wasted on that sort of run first team ,then in that system he should be nearly flawless.

Watkins was a shiny trinket and a flavor of the month player, he may well go on to do great things ,but Fisher has rebuilt this roster to his specs. which is what Parcells would have done ,what Carrol would have done ,what Belicek would do,it's what he was hired to do and questioning his acumen makes me doubt posters more than him.

 

[Alan]

Memphis Ram thinking all things are immutable:
It's like some have paid little attention to what Fisher has said and done in the past with the Titans. Why would anyone expect anything different when he was hired?

Because you either adapt or you get left behind. How's that Fisher has never drafted an OT in the first round coming?

 

[Memphis Ram]

Because you either adapt or you get left behind. How's that Fisher has never drafted an OT in the first round coming?

Hard to get left behind when the what many call the best two teams in the NFL (and in our division) are using the same philosophy Fisher is trying to and has used all this time. And like I tried to tell everyone, Fisher has either never had to use and/or rarely selected high enough to where value meet need to use a 1st round pick on an Olineman

 

[Alan]

Memphis Ram calling a spade a club:
Hard to get left behind when the what many call the best two teams in the NFL (and in our division) are using the same philosophy Fisher is trying to and has used all this time. And like I tried to tell everyone, Fisher has either never had to use and/or rarely selected high enough to where value meet need to use a 1st round pick on an Olineman

How is that not adapting to changing circumstances? Either you continue to do what you've done in the past, as you asserted or you adapt as he has. You're using semantics to explain why he isn't doing the same things he's done in the past. In reality, the only thing that has remained the same with Fisher is his core belief that a strong running game sets the offense. How you get that strong running game has changed and he's adapted to that change. Whether its drafting OTs high because you can no longer rely on getting quality at that position lower in the draft or using a running back by committee approach. Fisher continues to show that looking at what he has done in the past is not a reliable indicator of what he'll do in the future. Beyond that core belief of his I mentioned.

As for what the Seahags and Whiners are doing, that's more of a question of circumstance than it is of philosophy. Neither of those teams have a QB like Brady, Rodgers or Manning and that dictates what kind of offense you are able to run. Pete Carroll ran a different kind of offense when he coached at USC. There is no doubt in my mind that he wouldn't love to have Denver's O and his D if he could manage it.

 

[Thordaddy]

How is that not adapting to changing circumstances? Either you continue to do what you've done in the past, as you asserted or you adapt as he has. You're using semantics to explain why he isn't doing the same things he's done in the past. In reality, the only thing that has remained the same with Fisher is his core belief that a strong running game sets the offense. How you get that strong running game has changed and he's adapted to that change. Whether its drafting OTs high because you can no longer rely on getting quality at that position lower in the draft or using a running back by committee approach. Fisher continues to show that looking at what he has done in the past is not a reliable indicator of what he'll do in the future. Beyond that core belief of his I mentioned.

As for what the Seahags and Whiners are doing, that's more of a question of circumstance than it is of philosophy. Neither of those teams have a QB like Brady, Rodgers or Manning and that dictates what kind of offense you are able to run. Pete Carroll ran a different kind of offense when he coached at USC. There is no doubt in my mind that he wouldn't love to have Denver's O and his D if he could manage it.

Not so sure about that last part Al, offenses like Denvers historically put their defenses on he field a lot.I doubt Seattle could play that defense so well but for the ball control their offense provides

 

[Memphis Ram]

How is that not adapting to changing circumstances? Either you continue to do what you've done in the past, as you asserted or you adapt as he has. You're using semantics to explain why he isn't doing the same things he's done in the past. In reality, the only thing that has remained the same with Fisher is his core belief that a strong running game sets the offense. How you get that strong running game has changed and he's adapted to that change. Whether its drafting OTs high because you can no longer rely on getting quality at that position lower in the draft or using a running back by committee approach. Fisher continues to show that looking at what he has done in the past is not a reliable indicator of what he'll do in the future. Beyond that core belief of his I mentioned.

As for what the Seahags and Whiners are doing, that's more of a question of circumstance than it is of philosophy. Neither of those teams have a QB like Brady, Rodgers or Manning and that dictates what kind of offense you are able to run. Pete Carroll ran a different kind of offense when he coached at USC. There is no doubt in my mind that he wouldn't love to have Denver's O and his D if he could manage it.

Sorry, but you've lost me here. Fisher's philosophy is to run the football, protect the QB, and play good defense (the message in the initial post) is what I was referring to in regards to adapting (passing league) or being left behind. I wasn't going beyond the "core belief."

As far as the OT "semantics," I only responded to a thought often expressed by many who believed that Fisher would not select an Olineman in the 1st round. Need and value rarely came together during his tenure. BTW, I question if what the Seahags or Whiners are doing being more of a question of circumstances given their personnel moves.

 

[Alan]

Thordaddy thinking ball control:
Not so sure about that last part Al, offenses like Denvers historically put their defenses on he field a lot.I doubt Seattle could play that defense so well but for the ball control their offense provides

I hear you Thordaddy but Denver's O isn't like the GSOT. It's not a quick strike O. They use the pass in lieu of the run for ball control and it allows their D enough time to rest. But that's not my larger point. The Broncos have an O much like the Cardinals and Memphis didn't mention them because their team doesn't fit with his view. Arizona has the same kick ass D that the rest of the NFCW has but their O is more like Denvers. When did that happen? It happened after they got Palmer. Palmer is a poor man's Manning.

 

[Alan]

Sorry, but you've lost me here. Fisher's philosophy is to run the football, protect the QB, and play good defense (the message in the initial post) is what I was referring to in regards to adapting (passing league) or being left behind. I wasn't going beyond the "core belief."

As far as the OT "semantics," I only responded to a thought often expressed by many who believed that Fisher would not select an Olineman in the 1st round. Need and value rarely came together during his tenure. BTW, I question if what the Seahags or Whiners are doing being more of a question of circumstances given their personnel moves.

My original reply to your original post was just in response to only part of your post. The part which dealt with your assertion about looking at what he did in the past to determine what he'll do in the future. Your response to my response was when we started to get to other issues. I just went with your flow. I think if you go back to the start of our conversation you'll see how it morphed into a discussion about the Sehags and Whiners (which you brought up) and core beliefs/what type of team they built and why.

As for the offenses of those two teams, if you really believe they would look like they do now if either of them had Manning as their QB then we'll just have to agree to disagree about that. :fishing:

 

[PhxRam]

Me and Stedman at one of the Buffalo Wild Wings Rams Draft Parties yesterday.
View attachment 1827

Very cool Ken.. He seem like a nice guy?

 

[Boffo97]

Because you either adapt or you get left behind. How's that Fisher has never drafted an OT in the first round coming?

Precisely.

Plus, I'm kind of perplexed that those who wanted Robinson all along would even want to think in terms of it being a philosophy pick rather than the better pick straight up since even I can admit there's a pretty good argument for the latter.

 

[Ken]

Very cool Ken.. He seem like a nice guy?

He seemed like a nice guy. He was there with Eugene Sims, Kenny Britt (who is really tall and we'll built) and Cudjo. They were there after the Robinson pick but before the Donald pick. I told Stedman he was the reason the Rams didn't need to draft Watkins. He chuckled. I told him I thought he was going to have a great season and he thanked me. I told Sims the Rams DL was the best in the NFL even without Clowney. He chuckled. I was a little bit geeked up to meet these players.

Here's a pic of me and my daughter with Sims.

 

[Boffo97]

Can't go wrong with that number.

 

[Stranger]

what wall?

 

[PhxRam]

He seemed like a nice guy. He was there with Eugene Sims, Kenny Britt (who is really tall and we'll built) and Cudjo. They were there after the Robinson pick but before the Donald pick. I told Stedman he was the reason the Rams didn't need to draft Watkins. He chuckled. I told him I thought he was going to have a great season and he thanked me. I told Sims the Rams DL was the best in the NFL even without Clowney. He chuckled. I was a little bit geeked up to meet these players.

Here's a pic of me and my daughter with Sims.
View attachment 1829

Very cool Ken. It is funny how we start to tee hee around our favorite players.

 

[Boffo97]

what wall?

The metaphorical, thus invisible wall.

Thus explaining why the writing had to be invisible too.

 

[Memphis Ram]

My original reply to your original post was just in response to only part of your post. The part which dealt with your assertion about looking at what he did in the past to determine what he'll do in the future. Your response to my response was when we started to get to other issues. I just went with your flow. I think if you go back to the start of our conversation you'll see how it morphed into a discussion about the Sehags and Whiners (which you brought up) and core beliefs/what type of team they built and why.

As for the offenses of those two teams, if you really believe they would look like they do now if either of them had Manning as their QB then we'll just have to agree to disagree about that. :fishing:

Seems to me that we immediately got into other issues via your original response to only a part of my original post. No biggie.

 

[Stranger]

The metaphorical, thus invisible wall.

Thus explaining why the writing had to be invisible too.

I distinctly remember the invisible ink on the invisible wall saying "Return of GSOT"

 

[Boffo97]

I distinctly remember the invisible ink on the invisible wall saying "Return of GSOT"

Did you use lemon juice to read the invisible ink? You have to use vinegar.

Of course, I skip all that hocus pocus mumbo jumbo and just ask the all knowing Magic 8 Ball.

Are we going to the Super Bowl, Magic 8 Ball?

I HATE YOU, MAGIC 8 BALL!!!!!!!!

 

[Alan]

Memphis Ram seeing a glass half empty:
Seems to me that we immediately got into other issues via your original response to only a part of my original post.

You: "It's like some have paid little attention to what Fisher has said and done in the past with the Titans."
Me: "Because you either adapt or you get left behind. How's that Fisher has never drafted an OT in the first round coming?"
Where are the other issues I brought up?

One way of looking at it is that I didn't disagree/I agree with the other things you said. Would you rather I just disagree with everything you say?

There's a reason why I don't just quote something another poster says and also why I bolden certain parts of what I do quote. Most of the time you can assume that I agree with the other part of what a poster said or I would have included it in my post. Bolded stuff is usually the part that I'm primarily going to address as a way of eliminating the chaff even further. This is done on purpose, under the assumption that it would cause less confusion, especially in long posts, but apparently that's not true for everyone.

I'm not going to change my style though so...sorry about that. At least now we're on the same page about what my quotes and bolded parts mean.

 

[Memphis Ram]

You: "It's like some have paid little attention to what Fisher has said and done in the past with the Titans."
Me: "Because you either adapt or you get left behind. How's that Fisher has never drafted an OT in the first round coming?"
Where are the other issues I brought up?

One way of looking at it is that I didn't disagree/I agree with the other things you said. Would you rather I just disagree with everything you say?

There's a reason why I don't just quote something another poster says and also why I bolden certain parts of what I do quote. Most of the time you can assume that I agree with the other part of what a poster said or I would have included it in my post. Bolded stuff is usually the part that I'm primarily going to address as a way of eliminating the chaff even further. This is done on purpose, under the assumption that it would cause less confusion, especially in long posts, but apparently that's not true for everyone.

I'm not going to change my style though so...sorry about that. At least now we're on the same page about what my quotes and bolded parts mean.

Topic: Circa 2012 Fisher: "We're going to be a team that's going to run the football (Stacy/Mason), protect the quarterback (Robinson, et al) and play good defense (Donald, Brockers, Quinn, Long, etc)."

My response to topic: It's like some have paid little attention to what Fisher has said and done in the past with the Titans. Why would anyone expect anything different when he was hired?

Other issue brought up by you? Fisher's history of selecting OLinemen in the first round.

Your style is your style, but IMO, discussions are far less fruitful when entire sentences aren't taken into context vs. the piecemeal approach that can totally disregard what is actually being expressed.