What Was So "Great" About Dick Vermeil? (Apologies in advance.)

[ozarkram]

Mod may I suggest moving this thread to the penalty box?

 

[Smed55]

Mod may I suggest moving this thread to the penalty box?

I don't see anything wrong here, I know I've kept myself under control, and I don't really have any problem with what Boss is saying!

 

[BOSS429Mustang]

Perhaps we'll find something to agree on in a future thread Smed55. For now though I guess this topic just isn't going to be one of them.

 

[Retroram52]

Ozark. This thread does not qualify for the penalty box. Disagreements are not banned. Using value judgments in statements are. This thread was light in comparison to the penalty box conversations and I have addressed the two sides and both have responded. Folks are slowly getting it how to have disagreements without using aggressive value judgments to present their points and that is how it is done without a couple of words used here which all have been addressed. Continue onward.

 

[Caynine29]

Whoa. Didn't realize this thread was still going. Lol. First of all... this thread was not designed to evoke a negative reaction. I understand that Dick Vermeil is revered in St. Louis. But, I made no negative references towards the man.

Also... to say that Vermeil "should have" won 2-3 Super Bowls with the talent he had, is unfair. You gotta remember that the core members of the "Greatest Show on Turf"... Kurt Warner, Marshall Faulk and Torry Holt... didn't arrive until 1999. Not to mention great linemen like Adam Timmerman, and Andy McCollum, who were both free agent acquisitions that year. Vermeil really only had all that talent for one year, and he retired again, following the Super Bowl. Prior to that, the Rams were still building the foundation. It all just happened to come together for us that year. The 1999 season, was a matter of the "planets aligning" over St. Louis, in the NFL universe.

Now, should Mike Martz have won more Championships? Well... that's another story for another thread. But, I can guarantee you that thread most definitely would be a negative one, if I write it, that is. Lol.

 

[Retroram52]

Well Caynine. As I surmise you are understanding, what anyone's intent is on a thread can invoke a range of responses that are outside that intent. I am glad you took the time to specify your intent, Caynine. However, because there is so much frustration pent up in the fan base from obvious reasons and sources, you are bound to get responses you didn't intend.

We can all vent on a number of topics in a number of forums and I believe we all know how to do that without getting into pissing matches or who has the bigger balls. So let us not squelch the ranting urge. Since none of us are mind readers, specificity is the key when you do rant.

If we were all mindreaders, we sure as hell wouldn't be on this board ranting. We all would have bought the Rams and made the changes needed. I know, I would have hired just about everyone on here to be my staff. SJ76 and KSUDodgers in player personnel development, Vita and Smed and you as consultants, etc., Ooops, I am drifting into this fantasy way too long.

 

[Smed55]

Whoa. Didn't realize this thread was still going. Lol. First of all... this thread was not designed to evoke a negative reaction. I understand that Dick Vermeil is revered in St. Louis. But, I made no negative references towards the man.

Also... to say that Vermeil "should have" won 2-3 Super Bowls with the talent he had, is unfair. You gotta remember that the core members of the "Greatest Show on Turf"... Kurt Warner, Marshall Faulk and Torry Holt... didn't arrive until 1999. Not to mention great linemen like Adam Timmerman, and Andy McCollum, who were both free agent acquisitions that year. Vermeil really only had all that talent for one year, and he retired again, following the Super Bowl. Prior to that, the Rams were still building the foundation. It all just happened to come together for us that year. The 1999 season, was a matter of the "planets aligning" over St. Louis, in the NFL universe.

Now, should Mike Martz have won more Championships? Well... that's another story for another thread. But, I can guarantee you that thread most definitely would be a negative one, if I write it, that is. Lol.

Whoa again, Martz's offense still was the #1 offense his first year, the holdover defense from Vermeil dropped off big time, to like the second worse D in the league. Martz then promoted Lovie Smith and they went to the Super Bowl, which the cheating and lucky Patriots just barely won.

The following year Faulk was dinged up and Warner got hurt early on. Now Bulger played well that year, but we all know he's not Kurt Warner. So should he have had at least one SB win, yes he should and would if NE didnt luck out, and part of that was we played prevent Defense and allowed NE to get into FG position. And if we didn't have the injuries the next year we "might" have gone back to the SB, but Warners injuries were the beginning of the end of what should have been our little mini dynasty, instead of NE's. And again NE should have never been there to begin with, the "tuck" rule was a BS rule and the Raiders got screwed big time!

I'm not saying Martz's was a great coach either, he was a egotistical lunatic. I think he would throw the red challenge flag on the coin toss if he could!

 

[Retroram52]

I agree with that assessment of Martz and many of your points Smed55. Martz was indeed a lunatic. A genius, but a lunatic. He had no tolerance for the infighting in the FO and he had little HC skills because he liked to micromanage what he was good at and that was offense. He ignored alot of his HC duties like scouting and drafting players and our drafts started to be nightmares in chaos. He tanked the defense because he believed we could outscore the opposing defense like his mentor Coryell. He hated running the football as well. Just pissed away a fairly decent franchise that Vermeil and company had built.

BTW, we should have had a Lombardi trophy from the Superbowl against Pittsburgh before Vermeil. Two big plays and we would have stopped them because we had them on the ropes until Ferragamo missed a wide-open Billy Waddy in the endzone and threw the pick to Jack Lambert. I TD to Waddy would have really stacked the momentum against the Steelers. That loss still haunts me and all those greats of the 70's teams got no ring!! It still sucks when I think about it.

 

[Smed55]

I agree with that assessment of Martz and many of your points Smed55. Martz was indeed a lunatic. A genius, but a lunatic. He had no tolerance for the infighting in the FO and he had little HC skills because he liked to micromanage what he was good at and that was offense. He ignored alot of his HC duties like scouting and drafting players and our drafts started to be nightmares in chaos. He tanked the defense because he believed we could outscore the opposing defense like his mentor Coryell. He hated running the football as well. Just pissed away a fairly decent franchise that Vermeil and company had built.

BTW, we should have had a Lombardi trophy from the Superbowl against Pittsburgh before Vermeil. Two big plays and we would have stopped them because we had them on the ropes until Ferragamo missed a wide-open Billy Waddy in the endzone and threw the pick to Jack Lambert. I TD to Waddy would have really stacked the momentum against the Steelers. That loss still haunts me and all those greats of the 70's teams got no ring!! It still sucks when I think about it.

Also, two big pass plays to Swann and Stalworth where our 5'9 -5'10" DB (Rod Pery and Pat Thomas) had them covered pretty well, but due to their lack of height Bradshaw's passes just barely went over their fingertips"
As Maxwell Smart would say "missed it by that much" . I'm sure that is a reference that I'm aging myself with and most fans on here won't get

 

[Retroram52]

Yea and the safety missed on the over the top coverage on the Stallworth pass. Like I stated. We hit Waddy in the endzone we go up 26-14 I believe and our D with the Youngbloods, Olsen, Mike Fanning, Hacksaw with Isaiah Robertson, and Brudzinski would have clamped down because we had shut them down all day before that INT.

With that loss, I was so distraught, I left the party early. It still bugs the heck out of me today. Good memories of some highly talented teams of the 70's. I just wish we would have won that bowl and the first one against Bellecheat. We'd have three Lombardi's instead of just one and being one and two in the bowl. Good stuff Smed. Another illustrious member of the 50+ club!!!!

 

[Smed55]

Yea and the safety missed on the over the top coverage on the Stallworth pass. Like I stated. We hit Waddy in the endzone we go up 26-14 I believe and our D with the Youngbloods, Olsen, Mike Fanning, Hacksaw with Isaiah Robertson, and Brudzinski would have clamped down because we had shut them down all day before that INT.

With that loss, I was so distraught, I left the party early. It still bugs the heck out of me today. Good memories of some highly talented teams of the 70's. I just wish we would have won that bowl and the first one against Bellecheat. We'd have three Lombardi's instead of just one and being one and two in the bowl. Good stuff Smed. Another illustrious member of the 50+ club!!!!

Yes other than the one SB win that we do have, it's kind of sad that we have to go back that far to think about, "what could have been"! But at least back then, it seems like we were always in contention.

As I've said on other post though, it has to be much tougher to be a Lions fan, I think they have played in maybe one or two playoff games in the entire Super Bowl era.

 

[BOSS429Mustang]

How about in '74 Retro. When the Rams lost to Minnesota in the NFC Championship game. When Tom Mack gets called for a phantom off-sides call inside the Minnesota 2 yard line, and Harris then throws an int. on the next play and we lose 14-10. I sincerely believe with the Rams having the best defensive line in the NFL that year (Youngblood, Brooks, Olsen, Dryer) no offense to Pittsburgh's Steel Curtain, that we would have shut down the Steelers running game in the SB, something Minnesota couldn't do. I believe it would have been a low scoring game, but our offensive line would have been a wash against the Steelers Defensive line, and we would have eventually won that game. As a matter of fact the Rams were only one of two teams to beat the Steelers the next year when they again went on to win the SB.

And how about '76? Physically man-handled the Vikings in the NFC Championship and still lose. Don't know if we would have beaten the Raiders, but we would have been a better opponent than the Vikings that again got run over in the game.

Guess those games bother me the most because my brother is a Vikings fan and I had to "tolerate" the indignity of it all.

 

[ozarkram]

I don't see anything wrong here, I know I've kept myself under control, and I don't really have any problem with what Boss is saying!

Since all is well then all is well.

 

[ozarkram]

Whoa. Didn't realize this thread was still going. Lol. First of all... this thread was not designed to evoke a negative reaction. I understand that Dick Vermeil is revered in St. Louis. But, I made no negative references towards the man.

Also... to say that Vermeil "should have" won 2-3 Super Bowls with the talent he had, is unfair. You gotta remember that the core members of the "Greatest Show on Turf"... Kurt Warner, Marshall Faulk and Torry Holt... didn't arrive until 1999. Not to mention great linemen like Adam Timmerman, and Andy McCollum, who were both free agent acquisitions that year. Vermeil really only had all that talent for one year, and he retired again, following the Super Bowl. Prior to that, the Rams were still building the foundation. It all just happened to come together for us that year. The 1999 season, was a matter of the "planets aligning" over St. Louis, in the NFL universe.

Now, should Mike Martz have won more Championships? Well... that's another story for another thread. But, I can guarantee you that thread most definitely would be a negative one, if I write it, that is. Lol.

Caynine I didn't mean to infer anything negative about you. My feeling is certain topics invoke a natural reaction. Like say were I to say does Deacon Jones belong in the top 100 players of all time? Now there will be those that say yes and those that say no.(not many) But really no good can come of the topic. IMHO.

 

[ozarkram]

Ozark. This thread does not qualify for the penalty box. Disagreements are not banned. Using value judgments in statements are. This thread was light in comparison to the penalty box conversations and I have addressed the two sides and both have responded. Folks are slowly getting it how to have disagreements without using aggressive value judgments to present their points and that is how it is done without a couple of words used here which all have been addressed. Continue onward.

Retro you misunderstood my reason for wanting to move the thread. But all seems well so by all means continue forward.

 

[Smed55]

Caynine I didn't mean to infer anything negative about you. My feeling is certain topics invoke a natural reaction. Like say were I to say does Deacon Jones belong in the top 100 players of all time? Now there will be those that say yes and those that say no.(not many) But really no good can come of the topic. IMHO.

WHAT? who would say D. Jones isn't one of the top 100 players of all time, Don't even get me going, I want names! who in their right mind would, oh, you were just giving a what if example
I kid with you, yes?

 

[Retroram52]

That is a distinct possibility Ozark. I am human as well. But we are cool and things are moving onward.

Yea Boss429, all those lost opportunities in the 70's against either the Caboys or the Vikes really bugged me as a youngster. Tom Mack was just enraged by the call and then when Harris threw that INT I think I was clinically depressed for a month after that. I bet it must have been just misery for you with a live-in Vikings fan rubbing the loss in every minute of the day until the next season.

Man I hated all of those losses. Yea, Youngblood, Brooks, Olsen, Dryer were awesome and then we had all that talent at the LBs and the secondary. Like I said, I hated all those championship losses and I hated it even worse when Rosenbloom died and that freakin idiot took over and just trashed a once proud franchise. Vita explained to me this past week-end why Steve Rosenbloom never stepped up and bought the team. It all made sense. I know we would have given the Raiders one helluva a run for their money in the bowl as well. We had a pretty stout running game of our own. So yea, so many lost opportunities but those are some excellent memories Boss429!!!

 

[BOSS429Mustang]

Isn't it amazing I/many of us can remember things like that but I can't remember what my wife said to me 10 minutes ago. I also find I can recite stats and scores from games and the Rams teams from my childhood, but can't remember who won the SB 5 years ago without thinking about it for awhile. I guess at that age my whole world revolved around football, and it left quite an impression. Back then it wasn't so much of a business as it is now.

 

[Retroram52]

Damn straight on all counts Boss429!

 

[Smed55]

How about in '74 Retro. When the Rams lost to Minnesota in the NFC Championship game. When Tom Mack gets called for a phantom off-sides call inside the Minnesota 2 yard line, and Harris then throws an int. on the next play and we lose 14-10. I sincerely believe with the Rams having the best defensive line in the NFL that year (Youngblood, Brooks, Olsen, Dryer) no offense to Pittsburgh's Steel Curtain, that we would have shut down the Steelers running game in the SB, something Minnesota couldn't do. I believe it would have been a low scoring game, but our offensive line would have been a wash against the Steelers Defensive line, and we would have eventually won that game. As a matter of fact the Rams were only one of two teams to beat the Steelers the next year when they again went on to win the SB.

And how about '76? Physically man-handled the Vikings in the NFC Championship and still lose. Don't know if we would have beaten the Raiders, but we would have been a better opponent than the Vikings that again got run over in the game.

Guess those games bother me the most because my brother is a Vikings fan and I had to "tolerate" the
indignity of it all.

The 80's were the worst for me! I was born in LA, my brother was born in SF. It was tough watching the 9ers win all of their SB's especially since they never did anything in the 60's and 70's, but the Rams always had good teams In the 60's, 70's and 80's, but couldn't quite get the big one.
My brother never really rubbed it into me, because we just aren't like that, but he would be wearing all his new SF gear, you know the ones that say SB champs, plus in today's world of ESPN and other cable sports there is always reruns and stories on past SB teams. Plus the 9ers had a nice little dynasty thing going, it sure would be nice to know what that's like!

We both have lived in Iowa now for about 30 years and it's always been tough to find Ram gear, until they won the SB. I could find gear for a couple of years, but now it's tough to find again.

I loved it when the Rams did win the SB, but I hated seeing all the "new" bandwagon jumping Ram fans everywhere with their Ram gear on. Never saw anyone around here other than me with Ram gear, this is Viking, Gb, and Bear country!

As I keep saying, at least we have one SB, and us old timers have memories of the old LA Rams, we could e Lion or Browns fans that have memories of "nothIng"