- Joined
- Jun 4, 2013
- Messages
- 9,029
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #21
It's called anticipating the open receiver and throwing it. Hill is far better than Davis. Not seeing what Hill can do is criminal.
Shaun Hill
- Thread starter RamzFanz
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
It's called anticipating the open receiver and throwing it. Hill is far better than Davis. Not seeing what Hill can do is criminal.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2013
- Messages
- 9,029
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #22
Begin? He's lost every game but one.
HE WITH HORNS
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2013
- Messages
- 3,856
Austin "the savior" Davis struggles a bit, and people want to start Hill. I'm not surprised by this at all. I'm in favor of playing Davis to see how good he can be, but yeah, people are very short sighted.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2013
- Messages
- 9,029
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #25
NO. I've always wanted to start Hill to see what he offers.
Leuzer
Daniel Leu
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2014
- Messages
- 2,166
Hill's lost his only start too.
It's a team sport. If the defense can't stop the points from being scored, then how do you expect to win many games?
Besides, Davis has played fairly well in all of those games, except for tonight. Plus he's young.
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2013
- Messages
- 9,029
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #27
Nope. People keep saying AD plays well, but he overthrows receivers all the time. AD is just riding great WR play IMHO.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 29,833
I'm not wasting any more time with this. This conversation isn't headed down the right path. Believe what you want to but don't presume that the rest of us are ignorant fools while you're the enlightened one. We watch the same games you do.
Sappy113
Rookie
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2013
- Messages
- 208
There's no rational reason for playing Hill. We obviously aren't going anywhere this season (again), and Hill is nearing the end of his line as well. He certainly isn't longterm starter material. Neither is Davis, I think, but he should at least get the change to rack up the experience and grow as a player. That MIGHT do something positive for us in the future. Starting Hill won't. I'm already past caring if Hill over Davis is the difference between 3-13 or 4-12, but it likely won't get much better than that either way. So, as we always do, time to look to the future and hope we don't gaze down a nuclear apocalypse.
goldenram
UDFA
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2012
- Messages
- 68
^^^^^^^^^This, brother maybe? NO ONE could survive behind that Oline..... if we started Hill, Davis would have been playing by the 3rd quarter with Hill injured again. TEAM needs an attitude adjustment. Looked like most of them packed it in after the Cook flag, including Schotty.
bigdog2834
UDFA
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2014
- Messages
- 41
- Name
- Donnie
I think we are just being trolled guys. Only explanation I can think of.
jjab360
Legend
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2013
- Messages
- 6,709
Exactly. Chances Hill comes back next season are slim to none pretty much no matter what happens. Davis otoh, is a RFA so it's pretty much guaranteed we're going to bring him back on the cheap next year.
Either way, this season looks almost gone but there is nothing gained for our future by playing Hill right now. He would have to be exponentially better than Davis to warrant playing him over the potential future backup or maybe even starter, and there is nothing in his past to suggest that is the case.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2014
- Messages
- 1,623
It already is. I know it sucks for the season to be dead and buried before the half way point, but we have seen enough losing from our Rams over the years to know when a season is dead.
It is now vital we now see what we have in AD over the rest of the season, as this front office has a big decision to make in the upcoming offseason regarding the QB position. There is no point in seeing what Hill has at this stage, as he is clearly not the future. The same goes for our whole roster and I liked that Fisher got Mason and Robinson involved. We need to get these young guys some snaps the rest of the year and get them ready for the future. It sucks to always be rebuilding and not competing, but no point being in denial about it.
If you are looking for fault, look no further than Mr Williams and his Sack City defense. At least we blitz a lot...
Last edited:
Rambition
Rookie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2014
- Messages
- 454
you may be right. i was in favor of having hill as the starter, as fisher had said he would be. i think he probably offers us the best chance to win in the short term. on the other hand, i like some of what davis brings, and that was a tough 49er defense. honestly, with the disarray that the offensive line is in, the woeful job the defense has been doing, and effort (or lack thereof) shown by our receivers in this game, i don't think any QB is going to have much success. is that a reason to stick with davis? some continuity wouldn't hurt. it's not much, but it's all i got for now.
Rambition
Rookie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2014
- Messages
- 454
are you basing this simply on the idea that you think davis avoided taking hits that hill would have? or, that hill isn't as tough as davis? i don't question hill's toughness one bit. as for the former contention, is it as simple as who can run around in the backfield faster or more elusively? i would say it isn't. maybe hill gets the ball out of there faster on lots of those plays and thus doesn't have to run around that way, for example.
Behind this veteran OL any QB would have issues. They are not playing well at all. Davis reallllly reminds me of Favre just the way he slings the ball around. Hill would get killed. Pick your poison.