If and buts...

by Ryan Van Bibber on Jun 26, 2008 8:58 AM CDT in Preseason

I don't know if anyone saw this last week or not, but I stumbled across it last night and have been obsessing over it every since. It's an overview/prediction for the 2008 season from What If Sports. More than just pithy comments about draft picks and free agents, they map out the entire season, from week one to the Super Bowl.

I really dig it; although, I completely disagree with their 5-11, last place prediction for the Rams. Come on, are we really goning to be worse than the 49ers? No way. They do make a good point about that brutal schedule through the first half of the season. According to their predictions, the first 7 games feature five playoff teams, both Super Bowl teams (Dallas and New England in this sim) and all with a better than .500 record.

Let's delve into a couple of their findings.

The prediction glosses over the impact of last year's injury outbreak and the return of those players to full health, not to mention the addition of Jacob Bell on the o-line. That takes something away from it. Even with the injuries last season, the Rams still managed a few close games, notably a 16-17 home loss to the 49ers in week 2, a 31-34 home loss to the Cardinals in week 5, and a 19-24 home loss to the Seahawks in week 12. With healthier starters and key additions to both the defense and offense, I think their predictions of home losses to all of those teams are a bit dire.

That said, the first half of the schedule is brutal to say the least. Since when did scheduling mandate that last season's cellar dwellers had to play the playoff teams?

I also have a qualm with their identification of turnovers as the most exploitable weakness. The Rams were the worst in the NFC for turnovers, giving opponents 37. But take a look behind those numbers. Marc Bulger fumbled the ball 6 times, losing 5, and threw 15 INTs, his worst season for turnovers since 2003. I hate to trot the injury excuse everytime I hear criticism about the Rams, but I think it's waranted in this case.

With a healthy o-line in front of him, Marc Bulger would have turned the ball over 20 times. No way. That's not to say he would never have turned it over, but 20 times? Gus Frerotte had 12 INTs and one fumble lost; Gus Frerotte probably wouldn't have played without the injuries on the o-line that left Marc Bulger vulnerable to 37 sacks, a concussion and all the other bruises and bumps keeping him off his game. (it's not unreasonable to be concerned about Bulger's recovery from last season.)

The prediction makers did have some nice things to say about the Rams, though. They project Chris Long to accumulate 34 tackles and 7 sacks. But they saved their bulk of their gushing for Steven Jackson:

Steven Jackson - Dude is a monster (in all the best ways possible). When offensive coordinator Al Saunders says that Jackson has not yet even touched his potential, our jaws drop. But, we believe him. Saunders has helped to maximize the productivity of guys including Marshall Faulk, Priest Holmes, Larry Johnson and Clinton Portis. Steven Jackson is not just in the same conversation as those guys; he could end up being better. In the first year of the new system, we give him 1,823 total yards and 15 touchdowns.

Like any good prediction maker, they left themselves some wiggle room, and they'll need it. I don't think there's a playoff team here, but I don't think it's crazy or homerism or crazy homerism that the Rams can get to 7 wins.

Finally, here's another "what if" for the comments section. What if the Rams do only win 5 games? Does Scott Linehan keep his job? Does Steven Jackson become trade bait? Does the team start making plans to beat feet to LA?

0 recs | 10 comments

Comments

5 wins would be bad...

Linehan and Jackson would both be gone after the year.
I know the schedule is hard, but with only 2 win improvement after all the changes made, i would think it would be the ax.
As for moving, a good season could even lead to a move, who knows.

jroman - June 26, 2008 reply

first 7

i think they have to beat two of these three: Philly, Buffalo, Washington. Won’t be easy, but those are the most winnable games. In Seattle, they can’t get embarrassed. The others, they’ve got to play flawless, probably won’t be enough to win against some of those power houses, but should give the team momentum for the last half, where they’ll need to pick up key division wins.

Ryan Van Bibber - June 26, 2008 reply

early predictions mean ...I don't think I should put that in the title

Honestly, who would’ve predicted 3 wins for us last season and been met with any positive reception? How about the Pats going 16-0? Or the Giants winning the Super Bowl? The parity of the NFL makes it damn near impossible to predict, well, damn near anything.
5 wins if we’re healthy? Failure. We’ve got too much talent and experience on the roster, outside of WR (Torry has both, Dru-B has experience and decent talent, and the rookies are rookies) to accept 5 wins from this group. Just like results, you can’t predict injuries in the NFL. If Romo gets hurt, how many people will stay on the “Cowboys are going to win the NFC” bandwagon? How about Cleveland (who WhatIf puts at 10-6 with an absolute record of 12-4)? Yes, their first line team looks powerful on paper; however, they are possibly more shallow than any team in the AFC. Predictions are worth nothing. Performance is worth everything.
I’ll wait until the K-series to start pulling predictions out of my ass.

3k - June 26, 2008 reply

I agree 100%

Predictions on the NFL season are virtously worthless. There’s just way too much parity. And frankly, it’s not good parity either. Most games are stinkers, week to week.

Tackle Box - June 26, 2008 reply

5 wins

would be even more dissapointing than last season. If that were to happen, Linehan would be out of St. Louis on Dec. 29, and SJ would probably be on his way out. I don’t, however, think the team will bolt for L.A. I live in Southern California, and there’s just no place to put a new stadium. The stadium propossal from Ed Roski looks nice, but putting it in the City of Industry would be ridiculous. That place is a dump, and certainly not a suitable NFL city. And there’s no stadium already in place that would work. The Rose Bowl has terrible parking and more than half the stadium is bleacher seats. And the Coliseum is in a bad area with no parking as well, plus USC has the rights to that stadium for the next 20+ years and more than likely wouldn’t allow an NFL team to share a home with them. So I think the Rams will stay in St. Louis no matter what, but if Linehan can’t get at least 7 wins this season, I think he’s gone.

BruinFanBaby - June 26, 2008 reply

With that schedule...

5 wins is going to be just peachy.

About the 49ers, I think Martz is going to try his best to show up Haslett, although it didn’t really amount to much 2 yrs ago. Not sure how much revival Martz can do in SF, since they are a pretty bad team.

Martz and Haslett matchups are classic…I still have the 2000 wild card game on tape that I break out every now and then. Even though the Rams lost, it was an amazing comeback.

Downing Rules - June 26, 2008 reply