bash-on: `O' Line, backs and tight ends. Are we going to go into a maximum protection shell against that Tampa Bay pass rush? Do we really think that our tackles can stand up against Gaines Adams & friends? Or that the middle of our line can keep those tackles out and that our backs will get the right reads and make their blitz pick-ups? If we pull back to protect, what does that do to our passing game? More screens and draws? Given time to throw, are the Tampa Bay cornerbacks going to be able to stay with our wide-outs?

Bash-on Regardless

Jim Thomas: Good questions. The Tampa defense has hardly been a juggernaut so far this season. They have given up more yards than the Rams. Gaines Adams has yet to record his first NFL sack. In short, although still good, the Bucs defense isn't what it used to be. There's no Warren Sapp, no Simeon Rice, no Booger McFarland. I would love to see the Rams establish the run, then start working in play-action. With Bennett back in good health, I'd like to see the 3-receiver set become the base offensive set, rather than two tight ends. You can still send out a lot of receivers on patterns if you get the ball out quick.

Tater: Jim, You mentioned that Tory Holt did not speak to the press after the game. I'm sure he was upset about his very rare fumble. But could he also be peaved that after his fumble his number was not called? Is this a trend? Last week after Action Jacksons fumbles he was an afterthought. Could this also be a reason for Tory's silence?

Jim Thomas: Tater, you noticed this too!!! The Oliver Stone in me wonders the same thing. (Jackson and Holt getting little action after costly fumbles.) Here's an intriguing add-on to Holt's silence. Yesterday, a few reporters caught up with Jackson in the hallway at Rams Park as he was leaving, and Jackson cleared the air on his sideline tantrum. Well, about a half hour before that, Holt walked out and (politely) declined to speak to reporters. Very curious, since Holt almost always is willing to share his thoughts _ win, lose, draw, good game or bad. P.S. _ I thought Holt looked much more like the old Holt against San Francisco in terms of his knee. I think the fact that the Rams really practice only three times a week once they hit the regular season mode (Weds., Thurs., Fri.,) probably is helping the knee and keeping it from getting overworked.

Dave Fish, Roch N.Y.: Well I have to say that I am not to surprised by the 0-2 start.But the way they lost is a bit surprising.I feel like I'm watching a real good team lose and can't figure out why. The pundits will say turnovers will kill you and thats whats happening here. The offence looks pitiful the coach is to blame and the lack of depth is not an excuse. We will have a long season but I will continue to watch and if I lived in St. Louis I would have season tickets and would not bail.

Jim Thomas: However, disappointing the loss to San Francisco was, I thought it was a very entertaining game. Lots of intensity. Lots of twists and turns in the plot. Drama at the end. I know the fans want better. We all want better. But I think we all we're spoiled but what happened from 1999-2003. It's not as if the Rams have fallen off the earth since then (although it might still happen!!!) They've only been mediocre since that last division title in '03. Overall, I think the fans have hung in pretty well.
Anyway, I'm rambling. Again, the most dumbfounding part of the first two games has been the offense's inability to score TDs. The special teams were very good in Game 1, not so good in Game 2. The defense was good in Game 2, not so good in Game 1. But where are the points?

Mike: Why does Olsen insist on running plays, such as the end around to Bruce or the quick outs to Bruce and Holt, to WRs that can't run, have no blocking in front of them, and that were never known for their abilities to make defenders miss in the first place? If they're going to run plays like that, why not try to get Hagans on the field here and there?

Jim Thomas: In my mind, the end-round to Bruce was a good call, but at the wrong spot on the field. I believe he was running to the short side of the field _ I think the Rams were on the near hash. Also, when you run that play down that close to the goal line, the defenders are right there. Even if they're fooled, they don't have that far to run to recover. Do you recall one of the first plays of the game? It may have been the first. The Rams faked an end around, but handed it off instead. Had the end gotten the ball there, in the middle of the field with plenty of room to his left, it would've been a big gain. Most teams don't expect an end-around that early in the game. I would like to see more trick plays. Maybe a little no-huddle mixed in for the occasional series or two. But those quick tosses to Bruce and Holt confound me as well. For all the wonderful things Bruce and Holt have done in St. Louis, those quick tosses have never been their forte. I'm not sure why the Rams keep trying them.

kent smith: I hate to be a Linehan hater right now, but losing two at home, maybe it's time to for a change, I see Rich Brooks written all over this Rams team. Can the Rams wait a year, and see if they can get in the Bill Cowher race? Rams fan for over 40 years!!!(and a little frustrated right now)

Jim Thomas: Wow! It's awful early to start looking for a new head coach. Linehan is just 18 games into his tenure. I think it would take a total debacle for the Rams to think about a change after two seasons.